Committee  on  Docks, 


ADVERSE  TO  APPLICATION  OP 


THE  HEW  YORK  AKS  LONG  ISLUD  RAILROAD  COMPAHY, 


FOR  PERMISSION  TO  JOIN  THIS  CITY  WITH  LONG  ISLAND  BY 


RAILWAY  TUNNELS 


BOARD  OF  ALDERMEN, 


mm 

mi 


DOCUMENT  No.  2. 


NEW  YORK: 

MARTIN    B.    BROWN,   PRINTER    AND  STATIONER 
Nos.  49  and  51  Park  Place. 

1889. 


izx  ICthrtB 


SEYMOUR  DURST 


When  you  leave,  please  leave  this  book 

Because  it  has  been  said 
"£ver'tbing  comes  t'  him  who  waits 

Except  a  loaned  book." 


Avery  Architectural  and  Fine  Arts  Library 
Gift  of  Seymour  B.  Dl  rsf  Old  York  Library 


REPORT 

OF 

Committee  on  Docks, 

ADVERSE  TO  APPLICATION  OF 

THE  NEW  YORK  AND  LONG  ISLAND  RAILROAD  COMPANY, 

FOR  PERMISSION  TO  JOIN  THIS  CITY  WITH  LONG  ISLAND  BY 

RAIL  W  A  Y  TUNNELS. 


BOARD  OF  ALDERMEN, 

JAN  UARY    1*1  >,  1889. 


DOCUMENT   No.  2. 


NEW  YORK: 

MARTIN    B.    BROWN,    PRINTER    AND  STATIONER, 
Nos.  49  and  51  Park  Place. 

1889. 


DOCUMENT  No.  2. 


BOARD  OF  ALDERMEN, 

JANUARY    ^O,  lSJ^O. 


The  following  resolution  was  reported  by  the  Com- 
mittee on  Docks,  and  adopted  : 

Resolved,  That  all  the  applications  made  by  the 
New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  by 
Roy  Stone,  President,  for  the  consent  of  the  Board  of 
Aldermen  to  the  construction  of  a  tunnel  railway,  join- 
ing this  city  with  Long  Island,  mentioned  in  the 
accompanying  application,  be  and  are  hereby  denied 
and  such  consent  refused  ;  that  your  Committee  be 
discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of  the  sub- 
ject ;  that  the  report  and  accompanying  papers  be 
placed  on  file,  and  that  five  hundred  copies  thereof  be 
printed  in  document  form. 

F.  J.  TWOMEY, 

Clerk. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2014 


http://archive.org/details/reportofcommiteeOOnewy 


REPORT. 


The  Committee  on  Docks,  to  whom  was  referred  a 
petition,  signed  by  Roy  Stone,  President  of  the  New 
York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  praying  that 
action  be  taken  by  the  present  Board  of  Aldermen  on 
applications  heretofore  made  by  that  company,  to 
authorize  the  said  company  to  construct  tunnels  under 
the  waters  of  the  East  river  and  beneath  certain  of  the 
streets  in  this  city,  respectfully 

REPORT : 

That  it  was  not  necessary  to  remind  your  Honorable 
Body,  as  does  this  new  application,  "  that  throughout 
the  past  year  the  company  has  constantly  sought  the 
consent  of  your  Honorable  Body  to  the  construction 
of  a  tunnel  railway  joining  this  city  with  Long  Island,'' 
nor  is  it  necessary  to  inform  Mr.  Roy  Stone  and  his 
company  that  the  Common  Council  of  this  city  has 
constantly  and  persistently  denied  the  application. 
The  villification  to  which  the  members  of  the  Common 
Council  was  subjected  last  year,  and  the  villainous 
attempt  made  to  injure  their  reputations,  both  as 
citizens  and  officials — at  the  instance  of  Mr.  Stone  and 
his  friends — served  to  remind  the  re-elected  members 
of  the  late  Board  of  the  former  fact.    The  action 


recommended  herewith  by  your  Committee  will,  it  is 
hoped,  convince  Mr.  Stone  and  his  friends  that  a 
similar  line  of  conduct,  which  they  have  seemingly 
entered  upon  in  their  efforts  to  influence  the  members 
of  the  present  Common  Council,  will  serve  to  keep 
constantly  before  the  minds  of  Mr.  Stone  and  his 
friends  the  latter  fact  ;  and  it  maybe  well,  in  addition, 
to  assure  him  and  the  other  aiders  and  abettors  of  this 
tunnel  scheme  of  railroad,  for  benefiting  Long  Island 
at  the  expense  of  New  York,  that  your  Committee 
believe  the  Common  Council  of  the  City  of  New  York 
would  deem  themselves  recreant  to  the  trusts  con- 
fided to  their  care  by  their  constituents,  did  its  mem- 
bers, or  a  majority  of  them,  consent  to  the  scheme, 
thereby  inflicting  a  blow  to  the  welfare  and  prosperity 
of  this  city,  from  which  it  would  not,  because  it  could 
not,  recover. 

Yonr  Committee,  in  their  consideration  of  the  pre- 
sent application,  have  been  greatly  facilitated  by  the 
aid  given  them  in  reports  of  Committees  of  the  late 
Board  of  Aldermen,  made  on  the  subject.  The  major- 
ity of  the  Committee  on  Eailroads,  on  the  17th  day  of 
last  April,  presented  a  report  adverse  to  the  application 
of  this  company,  which  so  clearly  set  forth  the  objects, 
purposes  and  results  of  the  measure,  that  the  Board, 
by  a  vote  of  19  in  the  affirmative  to  4  in  the  negative, 
refused  to  give  the  desired  consent,  and  made  their 
opposition  final  by  refusing  to  reconsider  the  vote  by 


7 


which  the  adverse  report  was  adopted.  A  modified 
application  was  subsequently  presented  and  referred 
to  the  Committee  on  Bridges  and  Tunnels.  That  Com- 
mittee reported  the  scheme  favorably,  by  a  bare 
majority,  on  the  2d  of  January,  in  the  present  year, 
and  the  Board,  by  a  vote  of  a  11  in  the  affirmative  to  4 
in  the  negative,  laid  the  report  on  the  table.  On  the 
22d  of  January,  1889,  the  accompanying  application 
was  presented  in  the  Board  and  referred  to  the  Com- 
mittee on  Docks.  The  recommendation  your  Com- 
mittee intend  to  make,  and  which  they  trust  your 
Honorable  Body  Avill  adopt,  will,  it  is  hoped,  induce 
Mr.  Stone  to  withold  any  other  applications  for  tunnel 
privileges  across  Manhattan  Island,  and  that  thereby 
the  members  of  your  Honorable  Body  will  escape  the 
tirade  .of  abuse,  unjust  accusation  and  bitter  denuncia- 
tion which  seem  to  be  inseparable  from  the  expressed 
determination  of  a  large  majority  of  the  members  of  the 
Board  to  refuse  Mr.  Stone  and  his  partners  the  right 
to  inflict  irreparable  damage  upon  the  City  of  New 
York,  without  the  slightest  benefit,  directly  or 
indirectly,  to  our  own  people. 

Your  Committee,  in  this  connection,  deems  it  not  in- 
appropriate to  remark,  that  the  prevalent  custom  of 
attacking  members  of  the  Common  Council,  of  the  city, 
in  the  columns  of  the  daily  newspapers,  oftentimes,  as 
in  the  present  instance,  without  the  shadow  of  a  reason, 
is  growing  to  be  a  very  serious  evil,  and  one  that  mili- 


8 


tates  against  the  best  interests  of  our  city  and  its 
people.  The  position  of  a  chosen  representative  in 
the  Common  Council,  each  of  whom  represents  a  large 
constituency,  and  in  the  aggregate,  the  entire  people  of 
this  city,  should  be  regarded  as  an  honorable  one, 
until,  at  least,  something  dishonorable  or  dishonest 
has  been  proven  against  him,  and  should  entitle  its 
possessor  at  least  to  the  common  civilities  and  ameni- 
ties of  civilized  life.  The  contrary  is,  however,  the 
case,  and  public  sentiment,  framed  and  directed  gener- 
ally by  speculators  in  public  franchises,  who,  by  some 
occult  science,  secures  the  control  of  some  of  our 
public  journals,  is  against  any  man,  no  matter  how  up- 
right, honorable  or  competent  he  may  be  as  a  legis- 
lator, whose  public  acts  cannot  be  controled  by  them, 
and  whose  service  they  cannot  secure.  It  is  unfortu- 
nate that  this  is  an  uncontrovertible  fact ;  it  is  never- 
theless true  and  is  a  great  calamity,  as  it  deters  many 
high-minded,  honorable  and  able  men  from  assuming 
the  weight  of  odium  that  attaches  to  the  position,  and 
will  so  continue  to  deter  them  until  a  reaction  takes 
place  in  public  sentiment.  The  legitimate  fruits  of 
this  undesirable  condition  of  holding  public  office  in 
our  city  government  is  becoming  more  and  more  ap- 
parent to  the  most  casual  observer,  and  unless  an  anti- 
dote to  this  moral  poison  is  applied  speedily,  it  will 
result  in  the  utter  demoralization — not  to  say  annihila- 
tion—  of  government  by  the  people. 


9 


One  of  the  newspapers  most  prominent  in  abusing 
the  members  of  this  Board  secured  only  a  few  days 
ago  a  privilege  worth  to  it  many  thousands  of  dollars, 
as  it  enabled  the  proprietor  of  that  paper  to  add 
hundreds  if  not  thousands  of  superficial  feet  to  its 
proposed  press-room  area.  The  petition  for  the 
privilege  was  presented,  passed  by  the  Board,  approved 
by  the  Mayor,  and  a  duly  certified  copy  furnished,  all 
within  twenty-four  hours.  It  is  surprising  that  the 
facility  with  which  this  great  privilege  was  secured  to 
the  World  newspaper,  did  not  suggest  the  idea  of 
"  boodle  "  to  some  of  its  contemporaries  and  competi- 
tors, as  the  alacrity  exhibited  in  granting  the  privilege, 
without  reference  or  question,  in  the  anxiety  of  the 
Board  to  serve  the  great  newspaper,  certainly  leads  to 
the  suspicion,  if  it  does  not  justify  the  conclusion,  that 
improper  motives  actuated  the  Board  in  passing  and 
the  Mayor  in  approving  the  resolution  granting  the 
privilege  ;  and  as  the  privilege  is  revocable  by  the 
Common  Council,  it  might  be  well  to  do  so,  in  order  to 
satisfy  the  skeptical,  if  there  are  any,  that  such  was 
no1  the  case,  but  that  the  valuable  privilege  was 
granted  out  of  pure  good  will  to  Mr.  Pulitzer. 

A  slight  scrutiny  only  is  necessary  to  justify  your 
Committee  in  recommending  your  Honorable  Body  to 
set  the  seal  of  your  disapproval  and  condemnation  on 
this  proposed  scheme  of  uniting  this  city  with  Long 
Island  by  a  tunnel  beneath  our  streets  and  the  waters 


10 


of  the  East  river.  Eight  to  fifteen  millions  of  dollars 
is  given  as  the  probable  cost  of  the  work.  The  New- 
York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  Roy  Stone, 
President,  is  organized  to  do  it,  with  a  capital  of  $100,- 
000,  of  which  not  one  per  cent.,  or  81,000,  is  yet  paid 
up.  He  must  place  a  very  low  estimate  on  the  value 
of  a  vote  of  a  member  of  your  Honorable  Body  if  lie 
supposes,  as  he  seems  to  desire  the  public  to  infer,  that 
money  has  been  asked  to  secure  favorable  action  on 
his  application.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  entire  capi- 
tal stock — not  the  sum  paid  up — would  not  be  sufficient 
for  the  purpose.  Aldermen's  votes  should  not  be  held 
so  cheap.  No  preliminary  surveys  have  been  made  ; 
it  is  not  known  positively  whether  the  scheme  is  or  is 
not  practicable  ;  no  details  are  given  of  the  duration  of 
the  work ;  its  effect  upon  adjoining  buildings ;  what 
alterations  it  will  necessitate  to  the  location  of  sewers, 
water,  gas  or  steam  pipes,  electrical  conduits,  or  private 
vaults,  and  no  security  is  offered  to  save  the  city  or 
property-owners  harmless  from  any  loss  or  damage 
that  may  occur  to  either  during  the  progress  of  the 
work.  Mr.  Roy  Stone,  President,  is  simply  an 
employee  of  the  Department  of  Public  Works,  is  in  no 
way  or  manner  a  responsible  person,  does  not  own  a 
dollar's  worth  of  property  in  the  city,  if  any  where  else, 
has  no  interest  whatever,  other  than  the  amount  of  sal- 
ary he  draws  from  its  treasury,  in  its  welfare  or  pros- 
perity, and  it  is  very  questionable  if  any  of  his  asso- 
ciates are  better  qualified  to  engage  in  such  an  extensive 


11 


enterprise  ;  and  your  Committee  has  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  Mr.  Stone  and  his  associates  in  the  "New 
York  and  Long  Island  Kailroad  Company  "  are  simply 
cat's  paws,  chartered  or  incorporated  to  draw  this 
municipal  chestnut  out  of  the  fire  for  the  use  of  more 
important  and  better  known  individuals,  who,  if  their 
identity  appeared,  would  arouse  a  feeling  of  indigna- 
tion at  this  new  one  of  the  many  schemes  they  have 
inaugurated  and  established,  by  which  they  have 
enriched  themselves  at  the  expense  of  the  City  of  New 
York  and  its  people. 

Fortunately,  your  Committee  have  been  aided  in 
their  investigations  by  many  of  the  owners  of  property 
likely  to  be  affected  by  the  proposed  tunnel.  With  a 
public  spirit,  in  the  highest  degree  commendable,  they 
have  taken  a  leading  part  in  exposing  the  shallow  pre- 
tenses of  Mr.  Stone  and  his  associates.  These  gentle- 
men, through  a  committee  of  their  number,  have 
caused  their  views  of  the  project  to  be  presented,  and 
as  they  are  in  full  accord  with  those  held  by  your 
Committee,  it  is  suggested  that  they  be  printed,  with 
the  report  of  the  majority  of  the  Committee  on  Rail- 
roads, April,  17,  1888,  as  an  appendix  to  this  report  of 
your  Committee,  together  to  form  one  of  the  documents 
of  this  Board,  thereby  giving  a  connected  statement  of 
the  reasons  that  have  induced  your  Committee  to 
recommend  your  Honorable  Body  to  refuse  the  permis- 
sion asked  by  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad 


[2 


Company  to  connect  this  city  and  Long  Island  by 
underground  tunnels. 

The  following  resolution  is,  therefore,  respectfully 
offered  for  your  adoption  : 

/'evolved,  That  all  the  applications  made  by  the  New 
York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  by  Roy 
Stone,  President,  for  the  consent  of  the  Board  of 
Aldermen  to  the  construction  of  a  tunnel  railway, 
joining  this  City  with  Long  Island,  mentioned  in  the 
accompanying  application,  be  and  are  hereby  denied 
and  such  consent  refused ;  that  your  Committee  be 
discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of  the  sub- 
ject ;  that  the  report  and  accompanying  papers  be 
placed  on  file,  and  that  five  hundred  copies  thereof  be 
printed  in  document  form. 

WILLIAM  H.  WALKER,  1 
JAMES  F.  BUTLER,  |  Committee 

WILLIAM  TAIT,  \  on 

WILLIAM  P.  RINCKHOFF,  I  Docks. 
CHRISTIAN  GOETZ,  I 

Alderman  Storm  moved  that  the  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee be  laid  over. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board 
would  agree  with  said  motion. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  negative,  on  a  division 
called  by  Alderman  Storm,  as  follows  : 


13 


Affirmative — The  President,  Vice-President  Fitz- 
simons,  Aldermen  R.  J.  Barry,  Gregory,  Gunther, 
Morris,  Noonan,  Shea,  and  Storm — 9. 

Negative — Aldermen  D.  Barry,  Butler,  Carlin, 
Clancy,  Cowie,  Divver,  Dowd,  Flynn,  Goetz,  Hammond, 
Oakley,  Bapp,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait,  and  Walker 
—16. 

Alderman  Storm  arose  to  a  point  of  order,  and  stated 
it  to  be,  that  the  report  must  necessarily  lay  over  as 
the  printing  of  the  report  involved  an  expenditure  of 
money. 

The  President  declared  the  point  of  order  not  well 
taken,  on  the  ground  that  the  printing  of  the  report 
formed  part  of  the  procedings  of  the  Board. 

Alderman  Gregory  moved  to  amend  by  striking  from 
the  resolution  all  but  the  portion  relating  to  discharg- 
ing the  Committee  from  the  further  consideration  of 
the  subject. 

Bat  the  President  ruled  the  motion  out  of  order. 

Alderman  Fitzsimons  moved  to  amend  by  striking  out 
that  portion  referring  to  the  printing  of  five  hundred 
copies  of  the  report  and  accompanying  jDapers. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board 
would  agree  with  said  motion. 


14 

Which  was  decided  in  the  negative  on  a  division 
called  by  Alderman  Sullivan,  as  follows: 

Affirmative — The  President,  Vice-President  Fitz- 
simons,  Aldermen  1).  Barry,  R.  J.  Barry,  Gregory, 
Gunther,  Morris,  Noonan,  and  Storm — 9. 

Negative — Alderman  Butler,  Carlm,  Clancy,  Cowie, 
Divver,  Dowd,  Flynn,  Qilligan,  Goetz,  Hammond, 
Oakley,  Rapp,  Rinckhoft",  Shea,  Sullivan,  Tait,  and 
Walker— 17. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board 
would  agree  to  accept  the  report  and  adopt  the  reso- 
lution. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  affirmative  on  a  division 
called  by  Alderman  Walker,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative— Aldermen  D.  Barry,  Butler,  Carlin, 
Clancy,  Cowrie,  Divver,  Dowd,  Flynn,  Gilligan,  Goetz, 
Hammond,  Oakley,  Rapp,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait, 
and  Walker— 17. 

Negative — The  President,  Vice-President  Fitzsi- 
nions,  Aldermen  R,  J.  Barry,  Gregory,  Gunther  Mor- 
ris, Noonan,  and  Storm — 8. 

Alderman  Shea  was  excused  from  voting — 1. 

Alderman  Carlin  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the 
above  vote. 


15 


Alderman  Shea  moved  that  the  motion  be  laid  on  the 
table. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board 
would  agree  with  said  motion. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  negative  on  a  division 
called  by  Alderman  Oakley,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative — The  President,  Vice-President  Fitz- 
sirnons,  Aldermen  R.  J.  Barry,  Gregory,  Gunther, 
Morris,  Noonan,  Shea,  and  Storm — 9. 

Negative — xlldermen  Butler,  Carlin,  Clancy,  Cowie, 
Divver,  Dowd,  Flynn,  Gilligan,  Goetz,  Hammond, 
Oakley,  Rapp,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait,  and  Walker 
—16. 

The  President  then  put  the  question  whether  the 
Board  would  a^ree  with  the  motion  of  Alderman  Carlin 
to  reconsider. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  affirmative  on  a  division 
called  by  Alderman  Carlin,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative — Aldermen  D.  Barry,  Butler,  Carlin, 
Clancy,  Cowie,  Divver,  Dowd,  Flynn,  Gilligan,  Goetz, 
Hammond,  Oakley,  Rapp,  Rinckhoff,  Shea,  Storm, 
Sullivan,  Tait,  and  Walker— 19. 

Negative — The  President,  Vice-President  Fitz- 
simons,  Aldermen  R.  J.  Barry,  Gregory,  Gunther, 
Morris,  and  Noonan — 7. 


16 

Alderman  Storm  moved  that  the  whole  matter  be 
laid  on  the  table. 

But  he  subsequently  withdrew  the  motion. 

Alderman  Carlin  then  moved  that  the  report  of  the 
Committee  be  accepted  and  the  resolution  be  again 
adopted. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board 
would  agree  with  said  motion. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  affirmative  on  a  division 
called  by  Alderman  Divver,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative — Aldermen  D.  Barry,  Butler,  Carlin, 
Clancy,  Cowie,  Divver,  Dowd,  Flynn,  Gilligan,  Goetz, 
Hammond,  Oakley,  Bapp,  Binckhoff,  Shea,  Sullivan, 
Tait,  and  Walker— 18. 

Negative — The  President,  Vice-President  Fitz- 
simons,  Aldermen  R.  J.  Barry,  Gregory,  Gunther, 
Morris,  Noonan,  and  Storm — 8. 

Alderman  Carlin  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the 
above  vote. 

The  President  ruled  the  motion  out  of  order  as  under 
the  Bules  no  vote  for  a  reconsideration  can  be  taken 
more  than  once. 


\ 


APPENDIX. 


2 


19 


REPORT. 

The  Committee  on  Railroads,  to  whom  was  referred  the  accomparry- 
ing  application  of  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company, 
for  permission  to  construct,  maintain  and  operate  a  railroad  entering 
the  City  of  New  York  from  Long  Island,  by  two  adjacent  parallel 
tunnels  beneath  the  bed  of  the  East  river,  etc.,  respectfully 

REPORT : 

That  several  meetings  of  your  Committee  have  been  held,  at  which 
all  persons  interested  in  the  proposed  undergound  railroad  were  given 
an  opportunity  to  be  heard,  but  the  attendance  at  such  meetings  other 
than  the  promoters  of  the  enterprise  did  not  warrant  the  opinion  that 
the  public  generally,  or  the  owners  of  property  to  be  particularly 
affected  by  the  proposed  railroad,  took  the  slightest  interest  in  the 
proposition,  yet  it  is  one  of  the  most  stupendous  schemes  ever  presented 
for  the  consideration  of  the  local  authorities  of  this  city,  and  more 
directly  .and  intimately  affects  the  interests  of  both  the  people  and 
government  of  the  City  of  New  York  than  any  and  all  other  schemes 
ever  devised  or  carried  into  practical  operation  by  private  corporations 
or  individuals  to  enrich  themselves  at  the  expense  of  the  City  of  New 
York  and  its  most  vital  interests. 

It  is  proposed  by  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Com- 
pany to  enter  the  City  of  New  York,  from  Long  Island,  by  two  adja- 
cent parallel  tunnels  beneath  the  bed  of  the  East  river,  at  or  near 
Thirty-fifth  street,  and  continuing  in  such  tunnels  beneath  the  streets 
and  lands  of  the  said  city  to  a  terminus  at  a  point  between  Ninth  and 
Tenth  avenues  and  between  Twenty -ninth  and  Thirtieth  streets,  where 
the  said  tunnels  will  reach  the  surface  of  the  ground.  It  is  also 
intended  to  construct  two  branch  tunnels  and  railroads,  one  from 
Thirty-fourth  street  and  Fourth  avenue  to  the  Grand  Central  Depot  at 
Forty-second  street,  and  a  second  from  West  Thirtieth  street,  at  Ninth 
avenue  to  connect  with  what  is  now  known  as  the  Hudson  River  Tun- 
nel, at  or  near  the  foot  of  Christopher  street,  North  river  ;  that  the  top 
lines  of  the  tunnels  will  be  at  an  average  depth  of  60  feet  below  the 
present  surface  of  the  lands  in  the  city,  the  larger  part  being  at  a  still 
greater  depth,  and  that  at  all  points  of  intersection  of  the  routes  of  said 
tunnels  with  the  different  lines  of  elevated  railways,  at  other  suitable 


20 


points  it  is  intended  lo  e(»nstniet  and  operate  passenger  elevators  in 
veiiieal  shafts,  on  property  of  tht  company  to  connect  with  the  two 

lines  of  railroad  for  purposet  of  "  traffic." 

four  Committee  would  most  cheerfully  reeoininend  that  your  Hon- 
orable Body  should  consent  to  the  (  instruction  and  operation  of  the 
proposed  tunnels  and  railroads  were  the  lines  thereof  reversed  and  the 
proposed  facilities  for  1  traffic "  alTorded  to  residents  of  this  eit\ 
alone,  and  would  consent  that  such  1  unnels  he  constructed  transversely 
beneath  the  waters  of  the  Harlem  instead  of  the  Lust  river.  If  a  desire 
to  [mpT9TO  facilities  for  "  traffic  "  anions  our  own  residents  was  even 
In  a  remote  degree  contemplated  by  this  scheme  of  the  "New  York" 
and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  it  might  be  prudent  on  the  part 
of  your  Honorable  Body  to  assent  thereto,  or  if  the  intent  was  to  add 
to  the  value  of  property  located,  or  the  volume  of.  bu<iiu  W  ttausacted, 
in  this  city,  the  required  consent  should  be  given.  Such,  however,  is 
not  the  ca^e,  nor  is  it  even  intended  that  such  would  be  the  result.  Ask 
the  owner  of  property  or  man  in  business  in  Fulton  street  or  any  other 
of  the  business  streets  in'the  lower  parts  of  the  city  how  much  his  busi- 
ness has  been  increased  or  the  value  of  his  property  enhanced  by  the 
construction  of  the  "  New  York  "  and  Brooklyn  Bridge  and  the  opera 
tion  of  a  railroad  thereon.   Beyond  question  he  will  reply  that  both  have 

decreased  in  exact  proportion  to  the  increased  "traffic"  on  the  bridge. 

Authorize  the  construction  and  operation  of  the  tunnels  and  railroads 
proposed  by  the  "  New  York  "  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company 
and  you  will  inevitably  produce  a  like  result  in  regard  to  the  property 
and  business  of  the  central  portion  of  our  city  particularly  and  of  our 
whole  city  generally.  The  "bridge"  has  half  depopulated  the 
lower  wards  of  our  city  ;  the  proposed  tunnels  and  railroads  will  com- 
plete the  depopulating  process  for  the  central  and  upper  wards.  As  a 
result,  business  will  diminish  with  the  reduction  or  stoppage  of  the 
increase  of  our  resident  population  ;  the  value  of  land  and  buildings, 
will  diminish  in  exact  proportion,  and  your  Committee  believe  that  if 
the  scheme  ever  reaches  fruition  the  decadence  of  the  City  of  New 
York  will  date  from  that  time. 

But,  if  possible,  even  a  worse  danger  threatens  our  city  in  the  event 
of  the  success  of  this  scheme.  It  will,  in  all  probability,  destroy  the 
commerce  of  the  port  of  New  York,  and  inflict  a  blow  to  the  future 
progress  of  this  city  from  which  it  will  not,  because  it  cannot,  recover. 
It  will  be  perceived  that  broad  tunnels  are  to  be  constructed  from  West 
Thirtieth  street  and  Ninth  avenue  to  connect  with  "  what  is  known  as 
the  Hudson  River  Tunnel,  at  or  near  the  foot  of  Christopher  street, 
North  river."  For  what  purpose,  it  may  be  asked,  are  these  tunnels  to 


21 


be  constructed?  The  company  will  answer:  To  facilitate  "  traffic, " 
leaving  the  unsophisticated  and,  in  consequence,  unsuspecting  New 
Yorker  to  infer  that  passenger  "traffic"  is  alone  intended.  But  a 
merely  superficial  examination  must  be  sufficient  to  convince  the  most 
skeptical  that  passenger  '  traffic  "  is  a  mere  blind,  a  subterfuge,  and 
intended  to  deceive  both  the  people  and  government  of  this  city.  Your 
Committee  believe  they  are  warranted  in  saying  that  the  proposed  tun- 
nel scheme  of  railroad  is  intended  almost  solely  as  a  means  of  diverting 
commerce  and  trade  from  the  port  of  New  York  to  the  eastern  end  and 
other  portions  of  Long  Island.  It  has  come  to  their  knowledge  that  a 
syndicate  of  capitalists  have  succeeded  in  obtaining  possession  of 
many  thousands  of  acres  of  land  from  the  remnants  of  the  Indian 
tribes  that  once  inhabited  the  eastern  end  of  Long  Island,  now  nearly 
extinct,  on  the  shores  of  portions  of  which  lands  are  many  excellent 
harbors,  with  a  sufficient  depth  of  water  to  float  vessels  of  the  greatest 
tonnage  ;  that  for  many  years  these  capitalists  have  had  in  contempla- 
tion the  establishment  of  lines  of  fast  ocean  steamers  of  large  capacity, 
to  be  run  in  connection  with  the  railroad  of  the  Long  Island  Company, 
and  in  opposition  to  the  ocean  steamers  plying  from  this  port ;  that  under 
present  conditions  it  has  proved  to  be  impracticable,  by  reason  of  the  ina- 
bility to  obtain  sufficient ' '  traffic  "  to  warrant  the  inauguration  of  these 
opposition  lines  of  steamers,  and  the  undertaking  was,  for  the  present  at 
least,  seemingly  abandoned.  The  unrivaled  natural  advantages 
vouchsafed  to  us  in  the  location  of  this  city,  the  formation  and  extent 
of  its  harbor,  and  the  adaptability  of  both  for  the  use  of  commerce, 
has  prevented  this  contemplated  diversion  of  its  "  traffic"  to  Montauk, 
Long  Island,  or  even  to  any  of  its  more  accessible  and  pretentious 
rivals,  and  so  long  as  this  natural  condition  of  things  remain  undis- 
turbed and  free  from  unnatural  or  artificial  interference,  New  York 
was  certain  to  continue  to  increase  in  wealth  and  population  in  the 
future,  in  geometrical  progression  as  compared  with  the  past.  Un- 
natural or  artificial  means  alone  can  stay  such  future  progress.  Even 
adverse  legislation  at  the  State  capital,  which  has,  in  successive  years, 
deprived  it  of  a  local  government,  bestowed  its  most  valuable  franchises 
upon  individuals  or  corporations,  sequestered  its  property,  discrimi- 
nated against  its  residents  by  exempting  non-residents  from  taxation, 
and  in  various  other  ways  sought  to  injure  and  dwarf  its  growth,  has 
failed  to  do  so,  nor  will  such  attempts  ever  succeed  if  the  representa- 
tives of  the  people  of  this  city,  in  the  Common  Council,  are  true  to 
themselves  and  continue  faithfully  to  watch  over  and  protect,  so  far  as 
they  yet  possess  the  power,  as  in  the  present  instance,  the  interests  and 
wishes  of  their  constituents. 


22 


To  grant  Ihe  applic-iit  ion  of  the  "  New  York"  and  Long  Island  Kail 
road  Company  would,  in  the  opinion  of  your  Committee,  be  an  arti- 
ficial (it  illicit  be  said  also  an  unnatural)  means  of  irreparable  injury  to 
the  ( 'ity  of  New  York,  and  every  business  interest  centered  in  it.  Once 
authorize  the  connection  of  the  tunnels  of  this  company  with  the  tun- 
nels under  the  North  river,  at  or  near  Christopher  street,  in  this  city, 
and  the  injury  is  done.  Every  pound  of  freight  that  will  thereafter 
arrive  on  the  west  side  of  the  Hudson  river,  opposite  this  city,  from  all 
portions  of  this  continent,  and  even  tie-  countries  from  across  tin 
Pacific  Ocean,  destined  for  European  countries,  would  then  be  passed 
through  the  tunnels  of  this  company,  beneath  the  feet  of  our  citizens, 

and  transported  to  and  transhipped  from  the  eastern  end  of  Long 

Island.  No  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise  w  ould  be  handled  in  this 
city,  except  those  used  for  home  consumption.  Even  the  freight 
brought  into  this  city  by  the  New  York  Central'  and  Hudson  River 
Railroad,  the  New  York  City  and  Northern  Railroad,  and  the  N< m 
York,  New  Haven  and  Hartford  Railroad  could  be  carried  in  like 
manner  to  the  same  destination.  Can  any  (MM  doubt  the  effect  of  such 
a  diversion  of  the  "  traffic  "  of  this  city?  What  will  become  of  the 
business  of  our  merchants,  mechanics,  stevedores,  lightermen,  boat- 
men, cartmcn,  laborers,  and  the  thousands  of  others  who  earn  liveli- 
hoods in  handling  the  enormous  quantity  of  freight  in  this  port,  both 
exported  and  imported,  as  all  imported  freight  may,  and  doubtless 
will,  in  like  manner,  be  landed  at  Montauk,  Long  Island,  and  trans- 
ported to  its  destination  in  all  parts  of  this  continent  and  on  the 
other  side  of  the  Pacific  Ocean,  without  entering  the  port  of  New 
York. 

Would  not  the  realization  of  such  a  scheme  as  is  proposed  by  the 
"  Newr  York"  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  partly,  at  least,  and 
to  a  very  great  extent,  tend  to  depopulate  the  City  of  New  York,  as 
w  ell  as  to  destroy  the  business  of  the  port  ?  The  classes  of  our  popula- 
tion above  mentioned  w^ould  inevitably  and  of  necessity  follow  in  the 
wake  of  business,  and  trausfer  themselves  from  New  York  to  Long 
Island,  and  it  is  safe  to  say  that  within  five  years  after  the  inaugura- 
tion of  the  scheme  100,000  of  our  residents  would  have  transferred 
themselves  from  this  city  and  become  residents  of  the  new  city  to  be 
established  by  the  syndicate  who  own  all  the  land  at  the  eastern  end 
of  Long  Island.  By  creating  the  embryo  city  a  port  of  entry,  which  is 
doubtless  a  part  of  the  scheme,  there  will  be  brought  into  existence  a 
rival  for  the  "traffic"  now  transacted  and  naturally  belonging  to  the 
City  of  New  York,  more  dangerous  and  injurious  than  any  now  in 
existence,  or  that  can  be  created  by  any  other  means. 


23 


Surely,  the  corporate  authorities  of  this  city  will  not  consent  to  the 
construction  and  operation  of  an  underground,  or  any  other  railroad, 
with  such  possibilities  for  evil,  and  as  their  consent  is  indispensable  to  its 
creation,  your  Committee  are  convinced  that  no  apprehension  need  be 
felt  by  our  citizens  that  such  vital  injury  to  their  interests  will  ever 
come  from  their  chosen  representatives  in  the  Common  Council,  whose 
first  duty  it  is  to  foster  and  protect  by  every  legal  means  the  progress, 
wealth  and  prosperity  of  our  city,  and  to  promote  the  business  interests 
of  our  citizens. 

How  any  person  interested  in  the  future  of  New  York  City  can  look 
with  patience  upon  the  proposition  of  the  "New  York"  and  Long 
Island  Railroad  Company,  passes  the  comprehension  of  your  Com- 
mittee. Innumerable  attempts  to  divert  the  traffic  of  this  city  to  other 
localities  have,  from  time  to  time,  been  made  in  our  State  Legislature 
and  elsewhere,  and  your  Committee  regrets  to  say  in  some  cases  success- 
fully— by  bridging  the  Hudson  river  and  impairing  the  free  navigation 
of  the  stream,  as  at  Poughkeepsie,  in  the  interest  of  private  individuals 
and  corporations,  and  to  the  advantage  of  our  rivals  in  cities  in  the 
Eastern  States — and  always  against  the  most  earnest  protests  of  our 
city  authorities  ;  but  the  application  under  consideration  surpasses  in 
cool  effrontery  any  project  of  a  like  character  ever  called  to  their 
attention.  Reflection  is  lost  in  amazement  in  contemplating  the  pos- 
sibilities for  evil  to  this  city  and  its  interests  that  are  contained  in  the 
application  of  this  Railroad  Company  and  certain  to  befall  the  city, 
if  the  proposition  is  favorably  considered  by  those  whose  first  duty  it 
is  to  avert  just  such  threatened  evils,  if  in  their  power.  To  ask  the 
representatives  of  our  people  to  inflict  these  evils  upon  their  constitu- 
ents by  their  votes  in  the  Board  of  Aldermen  is  certainly  an  evidence 
that  the  intelligence  of  the  members  of  this  Board  is  sadly  underrated 
by  the  petitioners,  who  doubtless  imagined  that  the  real  objects  and 
purposes  in  view  were  so  skillfully  disguised  in  the  application  that 
the  e  was  but  very  little,  if  any,  danger  of  discovery.  A  refusal  to 
grant  the  privilege  asked  will  now,  also,  serve  as  a  warning  to  deter 
other  companies  or  individuals  from  attempting  to  practice  like  de- 
ceptions upon  the  corporate  authorities  of  this  city. 

Your  Committee  beg  leave  to  make  a  suggestion  to  the  applicants  for 
the  construction  of  the  proposed  tunnels ;  the  title  of  the  Company  should 
be  changed  from  the  "  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company  " 
to  the  New  Jersey  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company.  The  localities  to 
be  wholly  benefited  would  then  be  expressed  in  the  title  of  the  company. 

In  conclusion,  your  Committee  being  of  opinion  that  your  Honorable 
Body  is  not  desirous  of  bringing  the  sand  hills  of  Long  Island  into  any 


24 


closer  or  more  active  competition  with  the  real  estate  located  within 
our  own  corporate  limits,  more  than  half  of  which  is  still  vacant  and 
unimproved  ;  that  you  are  not  in  favor  of  giving  a  syndicate  of  indi- 
viduals— a  "trust"'  in  the  most  offensive  sense— an  opportunity  to 
enter  into  active  competition  for  the  control  of  the  "  traffic  "  of  the  port 
of  New  York  and  the  business  of  our  own  citizens,  nor  desirous  of 
taking  any  action  which  will  tend,  in  the  remotest  degree,  to  interfere 
with  the  future  progress  and  prosperity  of  the  City  of  New  York, 
respectfully  offer  for  your  adoption  the  following  resolution  : 

Resolved,  Thai  the  accompanying  application  of  the  "  New  York  " 
and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  for  perm  i^sion  t<»  control,  maintain 
and  operate  a  railroad  entering  the  C  ity  of  .Ww  York  from  Long 
Island  by  two  adjacent  parallel  tunnels  beneath  the  bed  of  the  East 
river,  at  or  near  Thirty-fifth  street,  and  beneath  the  surface  of  the 
lands  and  streets  in  this  city,  etc.,  etc  ,  be  and  is  hereby  denied  |  that 
your  Committee  be  discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of  the 
subject,  and  that  this  report  and  accompanying  papers  be  placed  on 
file. 


A  report  of  the  minority  of  the  Committee,  signed  by  Aldermen 
Fitzsimons,  Conkling,  and  Storm,  was  pre<ent"d  in  favor  of  granting 
the  application  of  the  petitioners. 

In  connection  therewith  the  President  presented  a  remonstrance  of 
B.  F.  Watson  and  Charles  P.  Latting,  President  and  Secretary  of  a 
meeting  of  property  owners  on  Thirty-eighth  street,  against  granting 
the  application  of  the  New  Y^ork  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company. 

Alderman  Fitzsimons  moved  that  the  whole  subject  be  laid  over. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board  would  agree  with 
the  motion  of  Alderman  Fitzsimons. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  negative,  on  a  division,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative— The  President,  Aldermen  Conkling,  Cowie,  Fitzsimons, 
Hubbell,  McMurray,  and  Storm — 7. 

Negative — Vice-President  Dowling,  Aldermen  Barry,  Benjamin, 
Butler,  Clancy,  Divver,  Holland,  Martin,  Mooney,  Joseph  Murray, 
Oakley,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait,  Yon  Minden,  and  Walker— 16. 

The  President  then  put  the  question  whether  the  Board  would  agree 
with  the  motion  of  Alderman  Fitzsimons  to  substitute  the  report  of  the 
minority  for  that  of  the  ma  jority. 


JAMES  J.  MOONEY, 
W  IU.IAM  TAIT. 
JOSEPH  MURRAY, 
WILLIAM  l\  RINCKHOFF 


(  ommittee 

on 
Railroads 


25 


Which  was  decided  in  the  negative,  on  a  division,  as  fellows  : 
Affirmative — Aldermen  Conkling,  Fitzsimons,  Hubbell,  and  Storm 
—4. 

Negative — The  President,  Vice-President  Dowling,  Aldermen  Barry, 
Benjamin,  Butler,  Clancy,  Cowie,  Diwer,  Holland,  McMurray,  Martin, 
Mooney,  Joseph  Murray,  Oakley,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait,  Von 
Minden,  and  Walker — 19. 

Alderman  Storm  moved  that  the  whole  matter  he  laid  on  the  table. 

The  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Board  would  agree  with 
said  motion. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  negative,  on  a  division  called  by  Alderman 
Mooney,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative — The  President,  Aldermen  Conkling,  Cowie,  Fitzsimons, 
Hubbell,  and  Storm— 6. 

Negative — Vice-President  Dowling,  Aldermen  Barry,  Benjamin, 
Butler,  Clancy,  Divver,  Holland,  McMurray,  Martin,  Mooney,  Joseph 
Murray.  Oakley,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait,  Von  Minden,  and 
Walker— 17. 

The  President  then  put  the  question  whether  the  Board  would  agree 
to  accept  the  report  and  adopt  the  resolution  recommended  by  the 
majority  of  the  Committee. 

Which  was  decided  in  the  affirmative  on  a  division,  as  follows  : 

Affirmative — The  President,  Vice-President  Dowling,  Aldermen 
Barry,  Benjamin,  Butler,  Clancy,  Cowie,  Divver,  Holland,  McMurray, 
Martin,  Mooney,  Joseph  Murray,  Oakley,  Rinckhoff,  Sullivan,  Tait. 
Von  Minden,  and  Walker — 19. 

Negative — Aldermen  Conkling,  Fitzsimons,  Hubbell,  and  Storm — 4. 


RAPID  TRANSIT  DP  THE  ISLAND 

INSTEAD  OF 

RAPID  TRANSIT  OFF  THE  ISLAND. 


WATSON. 


28 


Brief  of  13.  F.  Watson,  of  Counsel  for  the  Thirty-eighth  Street  Prop- 
erty Owners,  opposing  tlx-  Stroud  Applic  ation  to  the  Board  of  Aldermen 
of  the  City  of  New  York,  by  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad 
Company,  for  Leave  to  Excavate  a  Tunnel  across  Manhattan  Island, 
under  Thirty-eighth  Street,  and  to  operate  a  railroad  therein. 

Committee  of  Tfrirti/  >  i>jf<th  Qtonei  Property  Owners: 
13.  F.  Watson,  Chairman, 
0.  P.  Lattino,  Secretary, 
CnARLES  T.  BASKET,  Treasurer, 
Peter  C.  Baker, 
Samuel  P.  Avery, 
Wm.  L.  Andrews, 
James  M.  Const  a  itr.i: , 
B.  F.  Di  n nino, 
Lours  F.  Kiefer,  M.  D., 
Charles  Scribner, 
Thomas  Boese, 
William  R.  Grace, 
Henry  Steers, 
Ransel  M.  Streeter,  M.  D., 
Jacob  Wendell, 

Executive  Committee: 
Watson,    Baker,    Latting,    Barney,  Avery. 


29 


In  the  Matter 

of 

The  Second  Application  to  the  Board  of 
Aldermen  of  the  City  of  New  York  \  B.  F.  Watson's  Brief 
by  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  f  Opposing  the  Tunnel, 
Railroad  Company  for  leave  to  build  a 
tunnel  under  Thirty-eighth  street  and  to 
construct  and  operate  a  railroad  therein, 
with  branches,  etc. 


The  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company. 
—What  is  it  ? 

Who  are  the  real  parties  and  what  the  real  purpose  of 
this  scheme  ? 

In  forecasting  the  Railroad  Company's  case,  which  we  shall  probably 
be  called  upon  to  meet,  is  it  not  wise  to  recall  its  purposes  and  pre- 
tenses, heretofore,  and,  if  possible,  discover  the  real  parties  we  have  to 
deal  with,  and  their  real  intentions  ? 

First  Representation. 

The  Certificate  of  Incorporation  was  filed  in  July,  1887,  and  before 
any  opposition  had  occurred  to  make  it  advisable  to  conceal  the  real 
objects  to  be  accomplished,  it  said  that  the  purposes  of  the  incorpora- 
tion were  the  "  constructing  a  railroad  for  public  use  in  the  conveyance 
of  persons  and  property  *  *  *  commencing  in  Long  Island  City 
*  *  *  .  at  a  point  at  or  near  the  line  of  Borden  avenue,  and  distant 
about  one  mile  from  East  river  ;  thence,  partly  under  ground  and 
partly  in  a  cutting  to  the  East  river  ;  thence  under  the  East  river  by  a 
tunnel,  and  under  streets  and  lands  in  the  City  of  New  York  *  *  * 
to  a  connection  with  the  New  York  Central  Railroad  *  *  *  at  the 
corner,  or  at  a  point  near  the  Ninth  avenue  and  Thirtieth  street,  with 
a  branch  on  the  north  to  a  connection  with  the  N.  Y.  C.  and  H.  R.  R. 
at  or  near  the  Grand  Central  Depot,    ::'  *  *  and  a  branch  southerly  to 


connect  with  what  is  now  known  as  the  Hudson  River  Tunnel.  *  *  * 
The  length  of  said  road,  as  nearly  a-  may  he  est imateil ,  is  five  miles." 
*  «  «  ti  The  amount  of  capital  stock  *  *  *  shall  be  one  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars." 

The  Certificate  named  as  incorporators  Walter  S.  E.  Gurnee,  Thomas 
Ratter,  A  ugust  us  0.  Gurnee,  Roy  Stone,  .Malcolm  W.  Niven,  George 
R.  Shelden,  Frank  K.  Hain,  Oliver  W.  Barnes,  Everett  P.  Wheeler, 
Henry  8.  White,  all  of  New  York  City ;  Henry  S.  Hinderkoper,  of 
Philadelphia,  E.  Plat!  St  rat  ton,  of  College  Point,  L.  I.,  and  Robert 
Townsend,  Oyster  Hay.  I  .  I. 

Si.roM)  ReFBBSKNI  \TIon. 

Opposition  arose  because  the  Aldermen  thought  they  discovered  in 
the  application  a  scheme  of  the  -n  at  trunk  . line  railroads  to  force  a 
transit  under  New  York  City  for  freight  designed  for  Europe  and 
other  countries,  from  our  great  West. 

Subsequently,  and  on  or  about  March  17,  1888,,  for  the  purpose  of 
convincing  the  Aldermen  that  this  was  not  a  freight  road,  but  a  verita- 
ble poor  man's  New  York  City  passenger  road,  or  for  some  other  pur- 
pose, inspired  editorials  appeared  iu  Tin  Kmji 'm<  ri Hg  X<  irs,  in  which 
a  comparison  was  instituted  between  the  homes  of  the  laboring  popu- 
lation in  New  York,  London,  Chicago,  Philadelphia  and  other  cities, 
much  to  the  apparent  disadvantage  of  New  York.  In  them  this  tunnel 
road  was  held  up  to  be  the  remedy,  by  causing  the  laboring  population 
to  be  daily  transported  thereon  from  their  homo  in  Long  Island  to  their 
work  in  New  York  City  and  back  again  to  their  home-*  ;  thereby  it  was 
claimed  that  "the  horribly  overcrowded  tenement  population  will 
gradually  melt  away  and  be  transferred  to  cheaper  and  better  homes." 

Third  Representation. 

Subsequently  there  was  occasion  for  another  change  of  direction  to 
avoid  a  new  obstacle.  The  Aldermen  had  refused  their  sanction.  The 
provision  of  chapter  582  of  the  Laws  of  1880,  by  which  such  sanction 
could  be  dispensed  with,  had  by  the  Court  of  Appeals  been  declared 
unconstitutional,  and  the  Legislature  had  been  applied  to  for  an  amend- 
ment to  that  Act,  making  it  constitutional, and  the  Legislature  declined. 
Then  the  Railroad  Company  petitioned  the  General  Term  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  to  enforce  this  unconstitutional  Act  by  appointing  Com- 
missioners to  decide  in  the  place  of  the  Aldermen  whether  or  not 
public  necessity  demanded  this  tunnel. 

As  the  Court  of  Appeals  had  decided  in  a  case  where  a  railroad 
under  the  streets  of  a  city  which  happened  not  to  extend  beyond  the 


31 


city  limits  "was  an  underground  street  railroad,"  and  required  the 
consent  of  the  Aldermen,  it  became  necessary  for  this  Railroad  Com- 
pany to  show  that  it  was  not  a  street  railroad,  so  the  petition  to  the 
Court  contained  the  following  language:  "  That  petitioners'  railroad 
is  not  a  street  railroad,  will  not  depend  on  local  traffic  for  its  revenues, 
and  will  not  come  in  competition  with  any  street  or  purely  local  rail- 
road." No  reference  was  made  in  this  last  petition  to  a  connection 
with  the  Hudson  River  Tunnel.  Instead  thereof  the  description  was 
changed  to  read  :  "Toa  terminus  therein  (N.  Y.  City)  near  the  line  of 
the  Eleventh  avenue  and  between  Thirty-fourth  and  Fortieth  streets, 
where  it  will  connect  with  the  railroad  of  the  N.  Y.  C.  &  H.  R.  R.  R. 
Company,  with  such  branches,  turnouts,  sidings  and  switches  as  may 
be  necessary  for  the  safe,  speedy  and  efficient  transportation  of  persons 
and  property  into  and  out  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Fourth  Representation. 
The  General  Term  having  refused  to  hear  that  petition  until  next 
October,  the  pending  petition  to  the  Aldermen  was  presented.  It 
contains  the  following  language  :  "  And  having  subsequently  so  modi- 
fied its  routes  and  plans  as  only  to  require  your  consent  to  the  construc- 
tion of  its  said  tunnel  and  railroad  beneath  the  central  portion  of 
Thirty-eighth  street  *  *  *  from  the  East  River  to  the  westerly 
line  of  Tenth  avenue,  with  a  branch  from  the  intersection  of  Fourth 
avenue  and  Thirty-eighth  street,  beneath  Fourth  avenue  to  the  Grand 
Central  Station,  *  *  *  said  petitioner,  as  a  common  carrier  of 
persons  and  property,  now  respectfully  requests  your  consent  to  the 
construction  and  operation  of  its  said  tunnel  and  a  double-track  rail- 
road therein,  in  and  along  the  location  named  for  the  transportation 
of  persons  and  property  into  and  out  of  the  City  of  New  York. " 

Concealment  of  Purposes. 

What  are  the  real  purposes  of  this  corporation  ? 

After  these  several  changes  in  the  face  of  difficulties  to  be  avoided, 
involving  the  most  glaring  inconsistences,  can  the  Railroad  Company 
complain  if  charged  with  concealing  its  real  purposes  ? 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  change  of  location  by  law  can 
continue  until  construction  actually  begins  ;  therefore,  after  Aldermanic 
consent  obtained,  it  may  fairly  be  suspected  that  connection  with  some 
tunnel  or  railroad  will  be  resumed,  rendering  it  convenient  to  carry 
out  the  purpose  of  transporting  the  produce  of  the  West  under  New 
York  City. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  deal  with  this  Corporation  as  though  its  real 
purposes  are  concealed,  and  that  they  are  liable  to  turn  out  either  those 


32 


of  a  Street  Railroad  for  the  transportation  of  New  York  City  passen- 
gers, or  a  freight  railroad  between  the  West  and  Montauk  Point,  or 

both? 

Deceptive  Statement  of  Depth,  Dimensions  and  Transporta- 
tion Facilities. 

The  dimensions  of  the  tunnel,  and  the  character  of  the  transporta- 
tion facilities  proposed  are  briefly  as  follows,  as  indicated  by  a  publi- 
cation issued  by  this  Railroad  Company  a  few  days  before  April  7, 
1888  : 

In  Thirty-eighth  street  (30  feet  wide  between  curbs)  the  proposed 
"Tunnel  will  he  2<)  fee'  wide  and  22  feet  high,  and  its  tracks  will  be 
at  a  distance  below  the  surface  of 

107  feet  at  1st  Ave.  143  feet  at  5th  Ave 


109 

"  2d  " 

99 

"  6th 

111 

"  3d  " 

78 

"  7th 

133 

"  Lex.  " 

51 

11  8th 

136 

"  4th  " 

46 

"  9th 

141 

"    Madison  Ave. 

29 

"  10th 

The  fact  is  the  top  of  this  tunnel  will  be  seven  feet  under  the  sur- 
face of  Tenth  avenue,  24  feet  at  Ninth  avenue,  29  feet  at  Eighth  ave- 
nue. 56  feet  at  Seventh  avenue,  77  feet  at  Sixth  avenue.  89  feet  at 
Third  avenue.  97  feet  at  Second  avenue,  95  feet  at  First  avenue. 

The  circular  continues:  "It  is  intended  to  operate  the  Tunnel 
Railway  bv  Electric  Motors,  and  will  be  lighted  by  Electricity,  and 
ventilated  by  the  latest  improved  systems.  As  it  will  be  excavated 
through  solid  rock  *  -  *  it  will  naturally  draw  the  water 
from  the  rocks  above  it,  thereby  effecting  valuable  sanitary  results." 

The  transportation  of  heavy  freight  trains  up  the  steep  grades  pro- 
posed is  quite  as  likely  to  be  by  Fairies  or  Swans  as  by  Electric  Motors. 

To  be  relied  upon,  electricity  must  be  supplemented  by  gas  for 

lighting.  _ 
What  are  the  proposed  means  of  ventilation  ?    A  second  tunnel  had 
to  be  built  for  the  ventilation  of  the  main  tunnel  under  the  Mersey.  Is 
it  proposed  to  adopt  that  "latest  improved  system  "  ? 

There  is  danger  that  this  tunnel  will  not  only  "  draw  the  water  from 
the  rocks,"  but  also  from  the  broken  sewers,  as  in  the  Mersey  tunnel. 

How  has  it  been  ascertained  that  there  exists  "  solid  rock  "  through- 
out the  route  ?  It  cost  the  Mersey  tunnel  about  $800,000  to  make  the 
preliminary  test  and  even  then  it  proved  deceptive  in  part. 


33 


Reckless  Misstatements. 

It  is  further  claimed  by  this  circular  that  the  advantages  of  this 
scheme  are  "attainable  without  injury,  but  with  special  benefits  to 
private  property  along  the  line.  No  damage  or  annoyance  will  be 
caused  by  the  construction  of  the  railroad  to  the  residents  on  the  line, 
and  no  opening  or  occupation  of  the  streets  required,  except  possibly 
near  Tenth  avenue,  where  compensation  can  be  made.  When  the  road 
is  in  operation  the  residents  will  have  no  knowledge  of  the  passing  of 
trains,  and  they  will  have  the  full  benefit  of  a  double  system  of  rapid 
transit  without  any  of  its  disadvantages.  Union  Stations  with  ele- 
vators will  be  located  at  the  Elevated  Railroads  in  corner  buildings, 
and  not  over  the  street,  with  suitable  platforms  along  the  elevated 
tracks  connected  with  the  stations." 

How  is  it  proposed  to  afford  the  residents  of  Thirty-eighth  street 
"  full  benefit  of  a  double  system  of  rapid  transit"  with  "  no  openings 
or  occupation  of  the  streec  "  for  its  "  platforms  "  ? 

It  is  reckless  to  say  that  "  no  damage"  will  be  caused.  Common 
sense  and  all  experience  contradict  the  assertion.  Blasting,  by 
ignorant  Italian  laborers,  with  dynamite,  tonite,  or  giant  powder,  7 
feet,  24  feet,  29  feet,  56  feet  or  any  other  number  of  feet  under  the 
street  surface,  and  very  much  less  distance  under  sewer,  water,  gas, 
steam  pipes  and  electric  subways,  and  alongside  the  cellars  of  the 
private  residences,  and  the  foundations  of  the  churches  in  this  narrow 
street,  will  cause  not  only  anno3Tanee  but  immense  damage,  and  prove 
a  constant  source  of  danger  during  the  process  of  construction  and  a 
perpetual  annoyance,  in  the  operation  of  the  railroad,  from  oscillation, 
rumbling  and  foul  air.  The  Mersey  tunnel  damaged  the  property 
along  the  line,  and  in  a  single  instance  damaged  a  sewer  to  the  extent 
of  S30.000.  AYill  it  be  no  annoyance  to  have  the  foul  air  of  this  tunnel 
sucked  up  and  distributed  through  the  neighborhood  because  it  is 
vomited  forth  through  "  corner  buildings  "  ? 

Pray  what  are  the  "  benefits  to  private  property  along  the  line"  to  be 
anticipated  ?  Shall  we  estimate  as  such  a  benefit  a  dynamite  store- 
house under  the  foundation  of  our  dwellings  ;  the  location  in  a  narrow 
street  of  "two  parallel  adjacent  tunnels  "  with  the  "  necessary  slidings, 
turnouts  and  switches"  probably  in  our  cellars  and  possibly  with  a 
ventilating  shaft  through  our  parlors  and  bedrooms  ? 

A  Sixgulak  Inducement. 

Another  circular  issued  about  the  same  time,  and  signed  by  "  Roy 
Stone,  Pres't,"  conveys  the  information  that  the  laboring  people  of 
3 


the  city  arc  to  be  accompanied  through  this  tunnel  to  their  cheap  homei 
by  the  "Garbage  and  Filth  "  of  the  city. 
'  It  says,  "one  of  tin-  Aldermen,  advocating  the  tunnel  as  a  means  oi 
movin-and  utilizing  the  city's  refuse,  quaintly  remarks,  •  the  ocean 
hiis  „o  stomach  Cor  garbage  ami  tilth-it  rejects  it  will,  loathing 
*  *  *_earth  Is  TOW  only  purifier,  and  the  hungry  sands  of  Long 
Island  will  swallow  the  vilest  refute.' 


I  \<  \r  HOI  B  I  M  r.MATIONS. 


T,,K  SI  SI'K  IONS  OK  THE  HOARD  OK  A  I.DEKMEH  -I  >  s  I  1 1- I  KD. 

Again:  What  purposes  do  the  following  suggestive  extract  from 
the 'last-named  circular  indicate  ?  '  In  commerce  Hie  cost  of  storing 
:md  handling  goods  hen-  is  already  driving  business  away.  A  single 
transportation  line  carries  five  millions  of  tons  of  merchandise  past 
New  York  annually  *  *  *.  Other  indications  are  not  wanting  that 
fee  city  is  losing  its  grip  on  the  business  of  the  country  *  *  *  The 
improvement  we  propose  gives  hope  of  a  He*  era  of  prosperity- ti 
opens  up  twenty  square  miles  of  beautiful  territory  lying  neater  to  the 
(  itv  Hall  than*  Harlem  river  •  *  *  it  gives  quick  transit  to  the 
sea'  and  it  pavei  the  way  for  the  introduction  of  all  the  railroads  to  the 
N,  w  York  below  ground." 

TFIE  Ul'PEIt   WABDB  TO  UK  AliANDoNED. 

Vnother  circular,  issued  from  the  same  source,  and  containing  ex- 
tract from  the  editorial  of  March  17.  1886,  in  Tin  Engineering 
\tlr,  announces  :  11  We  need  hardly  say  that  the  natural  mode  of 
growth  of  large  cities,  when  not  interfered  with  by  topographical 
causes,  is  by  a  circular  spreading  of  population  in  all  directions." 

Then,  notwithstanding  the  veritable  fact  that  Manhattan  Island  is 
not  "  circular,"  because  the  Creator  or  "topographical  causes "  made 
it  elongated,  the  writer  proceeds  to  demonstrate  how  this  mistake  in 
creation  can  be  remedied  through  the  means  of  this  tunnel ;  the  process 
consisting  in  cutting  off  and  casting  to  waste  all  of  the  upper  part  of 
the  City  of  New  York,  and  in  piecing  up  a  "circular  "  city  out  of  the 
lands  of  Long  Island,  reached  by,  if  not  owned  by,  this  railroad  com- 
pany. We  are  assured  that  this  transformation  of  New  York  City 
becomes  desirable,  because  "  the  whole  eastern  third  of  the  city,  beyond 
the  Bowery  and  Third  avenue,  a  few  cases  excepted,  is  one  vast  and 
squalid  tenement  region,  crowded  to  suffocation  with  human  beings, 
and  a  breathing  place  of  wretchedness  and  crime." 


35 


This  cannot  be  claimed  as  a  very  flattering,  as  it  certainly  is  not 
a  truthful,  description  of  a  major  part  of  the  constituents  of  the 
Aldermen  to  whom  this  Railroad  Company  is  petitioning  for  favors. 

A  Test, 

If  this  is  not  intended  as  a  freight  road,  but  is  simply  a  passenger 
road  designed  to  improve  the  east  side  by  abolishing  its  14  wretched- 
ness and  crime,"  what  is  the  necessity  of  building  this  tunnel  entirely 
across  the  city  under  Thirty-eighth  street  ?  Would  not  a  tunnel  from 
Long  Island  City  under  the  East  river,  branching  to  Mott  street  and 
Mackerelville  answer  this  purpose  better  ? 

The  Unanswerable  Reply  of  the  Aldermen. 

To  this  kind  of  argument  the  majority  of  the  Railroad  Committee,  in 
their  report  hereinbefore  referred  to,  in  rejecting  this  tunnel  project  as 
subversive  of  the  interests  of  ike  City  of  .New  York,  and  particularly 
of  the  laboring  people,  whose  interests  they  are  the  peculiar  represen- 
tatives and  guardians  of,  replied  as  follows  : 

Your  Committee  would  most  cheerfully  recommend  that  your  Hon- 
orable Body  should  consent  to  the  construction  and  operation  of  the 
proposed  tunnels  and  railroads  were  the  lines  thereof  reversed  and 
the  proposed  facilities  for  '  traffic '  afforded  to  residents  of  this  city 
alone,  and  would  consent  that  such  tunnels  be  constructed  transversely 
beneath  the  waters  of  the  Harlem  instead  of  the  East  river.  If  a  desire 
to  improve  facilities  for  k  traffic  '.among  our  own  residents  was,  even  in 
a  remote  degree,  contemplated  by  this  scheme  of  the  •  New  York  '  and 
Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  it  might  be  prudent  upon  the  part  of 
your  Honorable  Body  to  assent  thereto,  or  if  the  intent  was  to  add  to 
the  value  of  property  located,  or  the  volume  of  the  business  transacted 
in  this  city,  the  required  consent  should  be  given.  Such,  however,  is 
not  the  case,  nor  is  it  even  intended  that  such  should  be  the  result. 
Ask  the  owner  of  property,  or  man  in  business  iu  Fulton  street,  or  any 
other  of  the  business  streets  in  the  lower  part  of  the  city,  how  much 
his  business  has  been  increased,  or  the  value  of  his  property  enhanced 
by  the  construction  of  the  '  New  Y^ork  '  and  Brooklyn  Bridge.  *  *  * 
The  Bridge  has  half  depopulated  the  lower  wards  of  our  city ;  the 
proposed  tunnels  and  railroads  will  complete  the  depopulating  process 
for  the  central  and  upper  wards.  *  *  *  But  a  merely  superficial 
examination  must  be  sufficient  to  convince  the  most  skeptical  that  pas- 
senger '  traffic  is  a  mere  blind,  a  subterfuge,  and  intended  to  deceive 
both  the  people  and  government  of  this  city.'  Your  Committee 
believe  they  are  warranted  in  saying  that  the  proposed  tunnel  scheme 


MS 


ot  rili|n,a<l  is  intended  almost  solely  as  a  means  for  diverting  commerce 
from  the  port  ot  New  York  to  the  eastern  end  and  other  port.ons  o| 
Long  Island.  It  has  come  to  their  knowledge  that  ;i  syndicate  of  cap 
italis'ts  have  succeeded  in  obtaining  possession  of  many  thousand  of 
acres  of  land  from  remnants  of  Indian  tribes  tint  once  inhah.ted  the 
eastern  end  of  Long  Island,  now  nearly  extinct.  On  the  shores  of 
portions  of  which  lands  are  many  excellent  harbors,  rith  ft  sufficient 
depth  of  water  to  float  vessels  of  the  greatest  tonnage;  thai  lor  many 
V(..,rs  these  capitalists  have  had  in  contemplation  tin-  establishment  oi 
"lines  of  fast  ocean  steamers  of  large  capacity  to  be  run  in  connection 

with  the  Railroad  of  the  Long  Island  Company/and  in  opposition  to 

the  OCeai]  BtC»lheri  t^yteg  ffOlfl  this  port.  *  *  *  Innumerable 
attempts  to  divert  the  •  traffic  '  of  this  city  to  other  localities  have  from 

timMu  time  been  made,  ::"  •  *  but  the  application  under  conaldemtion 

surpasses  in  COOl  effrontery  any  project  of  a  like  character  ever  called 
to  our  attention.  *  *  *  In  conclusion,  your  committee,  being  of 
the  opinion  that  vour  Honorable  Body  is  not  desirous  of  bringing  the 
9and  liillsof  Long  Wand  Into  any  closer  or  more  active  competition 
with  the  real  estate  located  within  our  corporate  limits,  more  than  half 
of  which  is  still  vacant  and  unimproved  ;  *  *  -  that  you  are  not  in 
favor  of  giving  a  syndicate  of  indi viduals-a  •  trust '  in  the  most  oilen- 
sive  sense-an  opportunity  to  enter  into  active  competition  for  the  eon 
trol  of  the  'traffic'  of  the  port  of  New  York.  *  *  respectfully 
offer  the  *  *  *  resolution  *  *  *  that  the  application 
be  denied. " 

This  majority  report  was  adopted  19  to  4. 

Mom-:  M i sst a t k m B n ML 
The  petition  of  this  railroad  company  to  the  General  Term  '.above 
referred  to  uses  the  following  language:  ."That  *  *  *  it  is 
necessary  to  build  said  road  wholly  underground  from  the  easterly 
boundary  of  the  City  of  New  York  to  the  westerly  line  of  Tenth 
avenue  *  *  *  *  and  to  run  the  same  in,  by,  and  through  a  tunnel 
beneath  Thirty-eighth  street;  *  *  *  and  that  your  petitioner 
intends  to  excavate" and  construct  its  said  tunnel,  and  build,  maintain 
and  operate  its  said  railroad  in,  by  and  through  the  same,  without 
making  or  using  for  any  purpose  whatever  any  opening  or  aperture  in 
any  street,  road,  avenue  or  public  place  in  said  city;  that  its  said  railroad 
will  pass  at  an  average  depth  of  one  hundred  feet  below  the  present 
surface  of  the  ground,  and  of  the  streets  in  said  city,  and  at  no  place 
less  than  forty  feet  thereunder ;  and  that  its  construction  and  operation 
will  not  interfere  with  or  require  the  removal  of  any  water,  gas  or 


37 


sewer-pipes,  or  any  other  private  or  public  way  or  conduit  beneath  or 
adjacent  to  such  surface  ;  that  its  said  tunnel  and  railroad  will  also  be 
so  built  and  constructed  through  the  solid  rock  formation  underlying 
said  city,  and  at  such  a  distance  vertically  and  horizontally  from  the 
present  house  and  foundation  lines  on  said  Thirty-eighth  street,  as  to 
preclude  the  possibility  of  any  injury  to  the  firmness  and  safety  to  the 
ground  above  such  tunnel,  and  in  the  neighborhood  thereof,  for  sur- 
face travel  and  traffic  ;  and  also  any  injury  to  any  building  or  erection, 
whatever  the  weight,  character  or  dimensions  of  the  same  may  be,  and 
whether  directly  over  such  tunnel,  or  upon  or  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  building  lines  bounding  on  said  street ;  that  all  opening  shafts  and 
passage-ways  for  the  purposes  of  constructing,  maintaining  and  oper- 
ation of  such  railroad  and  tunnel  are  to  be  made  only  upon  the  prop- 
erty of  your  petitioners." 

"Swift"  Witnesses. 
The  Railroad  Company,  among  its  publications,  presents  what  it 
terms  a  "  letter  from  a  special  expert  of  the  aqueduct  commission," 
signed  by  "  C.  L.  Klainbach,  Aqueduct  Inspector,"  in  which  he 
says :  "  There  is  not  the  slightest  risk  of  damaging  houses  by  blasting 
under  them,  if  only  very  ordinary  precautions  are  taken.  I  would  be 
very  glad  to  insure  the  property  for  one  quarter  of  one  per  cent, 
against  such  damage  if  the  roof  of  the  tunnel  came  within  ten  feet  of 
the  foundations.  *  ";-  *  There  has  been  an  enormous  amount  of 
powder  wasted  on  the  aqueduct,  and  much  of  the  work  has  been  done 
by  inexperienced  men,  and  *  *  *  there  has  been  no  damage  on 
the  surface." 

Also  presents  the  letter  to  "General  Roy  Stone,"  of  "George  P. 
Shebbard,  Rector  of  Holy  Trinity  Church,  Jersey  Heights,"  in  which 
he  says  :  "  The  chancel  of  our  church  is,  I  believe,  built  directly  over 
the  Erie  Railway  tunnel,  and  we  are  not  in  the  slightest  degree  dis- 
turbed by  the  passage  of  trains.  *  *  *  N.B. — This  church  is  80 
feet  above  the  tracks.  " 

The  answer  to  this  so-called  testimony  introduced  without  cross- 
examination,  is  briefly — assuming  it  for  argument  sake  to  be  true — 
who  is  to  insure  "  ordinary  precautions  "  from  Italian  laborers  ?  Who 
guarantees  against  the  possibility  of  powder  being  "wasted"  under 
our  dwellings  by  "inexperienced  men?"  The  construction  of  the 
Mersey  tunnel  under  the  direction  of  the  most  eminent  English  engineers 
caused  widespread  havoc,  notwithstanding  the  excavations  were  made 
through  solid  red  sandstone  and  with  a  boring  machine,  dynamite 
and  tonite  having  been  discarded. 


38 


In  answer  to  the  belief  of  the  reverend  witness,  it  il  charitable  to 
suppose  that  he  was  more  expert  in  those  beliefs  which  tend  in  an 
Opposite  direction  to  these  wretched  subterranean  passages.  It  is  quite 
certain  that  before  making  the  tunnel,  the  Brie  Hail  way  purchased 
every  foot  of  land  under  which  it  was  located. 

Tt9tb  Rkpbbbehtatioh — Thi  Company's  Bhikp. 

After  proposing  to  the  Aldermen  and  to  the  General  Term  to  make 
some  compensation  to  the  city  for  the  privileges  which  it  sought,  by 
paying  a  percentage  of  its  receipts,  this  Railroad  Company,  under  its 
present  renewed  petition,  at  the  first  hearing  on  .Inly  27.  before  the 
Committee  on  Bridge  s  and  Tunnels,  presented  the  printed  Brief  of  A. 
I).  Palmer,  Esq  ,  its  counsel,  arguing  its  right  to  make  the  tunnel  and 
railroad  without  any  compensation  to  the  city,  substantially  as  fol- 
lows : 

"  The  Company  has  been  duly  incorporated,  *  *  *  with  the 
design  of  building,  maintaining  and  operating  a  railroad,  as  a  common 
carrier,  for  the  transportation  of  persons  and  property  between  the 
island  of  Long  Island  and  the  City  of  New  York,  having  one  terminus 
at  or  near  the  northwest  corner  of  Ninth  avenue  and  Thirtieth  street  in 
said  city,  and  leading  thence  by  a  double  track  to  Long  Island,  with 
elevators  to  connect  with  the  surface  railroads  and  streets a1  convenient 
points  on  the  route  in  this  city. "  *  *  *  "  The  character  of  the 
route  to  be  traversed  requires,  and  the  exi>tiiiLr  law  permits,  the  con- 
struction of  such  a  railroad  within  two  parallel  ad  jacent  tunnels  upon 
the  routes  and  according  to  the  profiles  heretofore  brought  to  your 
notice  in  a  chart  *  *  *  submitted  to  you  *  *  *  on  or  about 
the  fifteenth  day  of  January  last,  to  which  chart  and  petition  filed 
therewith  reference  is  respectfully  mad". 

That  brief  then  goes  on  to  say  that  Long  Island  is  about  120  miles 
long  and  has  a  population  of  900, 0D0  ;  but  it  forgets  to  say  that  the  far 
greater  portion  of  such  population  resides  in  Brooklyn,  who  rarely,  if 
ever,  would  use  this  tunnel  in  going  to  and  from  their  business  at  the 
lower  end  of  Manhattan  Island,  on  account  of  its  distance  therefrom. 
The  Brief  reasons  that  because  the  improved  railroad  management  on 
Long  Island  for  the  past  few  years  has  induced  the  building  of  sum- 
mer residences  on  Long  Island  instead  of  on  the  shore  line  of  New- 
Jersey,  that,  therefore,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  City  of  New  York  to  sub- 
mit to  the  sacrifices  entailed  upon  it  by  this  tunnel,  without  any  com- 
pensation derived  from  its  revenues,  as  New  York  City,  by  means  of 
the  tunnel,  would  divert  patronage  from  New  Jersey  and  give  it  to 
Long  Island  ;  and  from  these  premises  the  following  not  very  obvious 


39 


conclusion  is  attempted  to  be  drawn  :  "  From  whatever  point  of  view 
the  projects  of  this  company  are  regarded,  it  will  appear  that  their 
realization  must  result  in  immediate  and  lasting  benefit  to  the  people 
of  this  city."  These  immediate  and  lasting  benefits  are  reasoned  out 
from  the  proposition  assumed  to  have  been  settled  by  experience, 
namely,  that  "  increased  facilities  of  rapid,  safe  and  economical  travel 
from  the  suburbs  of  a  city  to  its  centre  contribute  to  *  *  *  its 
prosperity." 

It  may,  in  passing,  be  suggested  that  the  correctness  of  this  proposi- 
tion, with  certain  limitations,  might  be  admitted  ;  but  it  is  a  very  dif- 
ferent admission  from  that  asked  of  us — that  it  would  be  more  to  the 
advantage  of  New  York  City  to  give  superior  advantages  for  commu- 
nication with  Long  Island  than  to  its  own  uninhabited  land.0. 

One  of  the  limitations  above  referred  to  is,  that  the  same  advantages 
do  not  accrue  to  a  city  or  town  through  which  a  railroad  passes  as  to 
one  in  which  it  terminates.  The  same  suggestion  is  applicable  to  the 
argument  of  the  Brief  that  this  railroad  company  ought  not  to  be  made 
to  pay  a  percentage  of  its  profits  to  the  city,  because  its  purposes  and 
designs  are  similar  "  to  those  of  the  New  York  and  Harlem,  New  York 
and  New  Haven,  New  York  and  Northern  and  Hudson  River  rail- 
roads ; "  for  all  of  these  railroads  bring  their  traffic  to  New  York  City 
and  stop  there,  while  the  design  of  this  tunnel  is — if  the  Board  of 
Aldermen  were  correct  in  their  conclusion,  or  if  every  indication 
developed  or  concealed  by  this  tunnel  railroad  is  brought  to  the  test  of 
common  sense— to  pass  its  traffic  under  New  York  City,  and  not  to 
stop  there,  but  to  stop  at  some  other  point  which,  as  the  terminus,  will 
reap  most  of  the  advantages  accruing  from  the  enterprise. 

A  Flimsy  Assumption  that  this  is  not  a  Street  Railway. 

The  Brief  proceeds  :  "  It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  company 
is  not  a  street,  surface  or  arcade  railway  company  ;  that  it  does  not 
ask  the  use  of  any  part  of  any  street,  avenue  or  public  place  in  the 
city  as  a  part  of  its  route,  distinctly  disclaiming  any  such  demand." 
■*    *  * 

Courts  judge  the  character  of  a  scheme  from  its  purposes,  inevitable 
tendencies,  apparent  characteristics,  rather  than  by  its  language  "  dis- 
tinctly disclaiming,"  for  an  evident  purpose,  that  which  it  has  by  its 
nature,  acts  and  even  words,  distinctly  avowed.  The  Court  of  Appeals 
has  decided  that  just  such  a  railroad  as  this  proposes  to  be,  is  "an 
underground  street  railroad."  In  that  case  the  railroad  began  and 
ended  in  the  same  city.  This  railroad,  while  it  has  all  the  characteris- 
tics of  that  one,  does  not  begin  and  end  in  the  same  city  ;  but  does  that 


40 


aber  the  character  of  thai  portion  of  it  which  lies  within  tin-  city  ! 
Would  it  not  he  considered  an  absurdity  to  say  that  the  Madison 
A  venue  railroad  was  a  street  railroad  until  it  CTOMOd  the  eitv  limits, 
and  that  such  crossing  transformed  that  part  of  it  within  the  city  lim- 
its to  something-  else  than  a  street  railroad?  There  is  nothing  in  tbil 
pretense.  If  there  is,  why  does  this  company  refuse  to  suspend  this 
application  until  that  precise  question  is  settled  by  the  General  Term 
where  it  is  still  pending  '.' 

The  Brief  continues  ;  "  That  it  proposes  to  pay  in  cash  for  all  the 
properly  required  for  its  use  in  the  city,  and  that  it  contemplates  no 
competition  for  local  travel  with  any  existing  surface,  underground  or 
elevated  railway,  but  that  it  proposes  only  to  construct ,  maintain  and 
operate  its  lines,  as  a  common  carrier  of  persons  and  property,  into  mid 
OUt  of  the  City  of  New  York."  "  We  ask  from  you  no  con- 

tributions in  money  towards  the  accomplish men't  of  ourdesigns,  and  as 
we  contemplate  the  expenditure  of  a  large  sum  of  money  at  your 
doors,  in  the  prosecution  of  a  great,  difficult  and  extremely  hazardous 
enterprise,  the  ultimate  cost  of  which  no  man  can  fortell,  we  should 
not  be  required  to  pay  any  other  sum  of  money  for  the  right  to  enter 
your  city  than  the  annual  tax  assessed  and  levied  upon  our  property 
within  its  boundaries." 

Is  there  not  a  necessity  for  another  Brief  to  explain  w  here  the  money 
is  to  come  from  for  the  payment  of  all  damages  inflicted  on  eighteen 
or  twenty  millions  of  property  in  Thirty-eighth  street  alone,  and  for  all 
property  taken,  and  for  the  expenditure  of  a  large  sum,  *  *  in  the 
prosecution  of  a  great,  difficult  and  t xtremely  hazardous  enterprise, 
the  ultimate  cost  of  which  no  man  can  fortell  !  "  Certainly  it  cannot 
come  from  the  capital  of  $100,000!  Certainly  not  from  any  sane 
capitalist,  if  it  be  true  as  pretended  that  the  revenues  of  this  tunnel  are 
alone  coming  from  the  fares  and  freight  induced  to  descend  from  100 
to  150  feet  into  the  bowels  of  the  earth  in  order  to  secure  transporta- 
tion only  from  New  York  City  to  Long  Island  and  nowhere  else. 

It  seems  impossible  to  contemplate  the  shifting  and  shallow  state- 
ments of  this  railroad  company  as  to  its  own  routes  purposes  and 
promises,  changing  position  and  hue  whenever  a  new  obstacle  renders 
necessary  a  new  turn  of  the  kaleidoscope,  without  exclaiming— New 
York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  thy  real  name  is  inconsis- 
tency !  In  the  confusion  caused  by  this  multiplicity  of  contradictory 
words  as  to  the  real  composition  and  intentions  of  this  Railroad  Com- 
pany, it  is  wise  to  remember  that  these  promises  are  written  in  the 
sand  and  will  not  endure.  When  once  its  purpose  is  accomplished, 
and  aldermanic  permission  has  been  obtained,  then  this  corporation 


will  cast  aside  the  mask  and  will  do  and  claim  everything  allowed  to 
it  by  law—  and  probably  considerably  more. 

"The  Mersey  Railway." 

Complete  failure  of  a  Tunnel  en  many  respects  similar  to 
the  proposed  east  rrver  tunnel,  and  in  most  respects 
affording  superior  prospects  of  success  to  any  which 
can  be  claimed  for  the  one  under  consideration. 
It  is  safer  to  be  guided  by  experience  than  by  theories,  when  the 
inquiry  relates  to  the  possibility  of  profitable  progress  through  the 
hidden  obstacles  down  deep  in  the  earth.    The  best  built  tunnel  under 
water  now  in  existence,  called  for  by  necessities  most  imperious,  and 
by  inducements  most  promising,  backed  by  wealth  to  any  required 
amount,  and  guided  by  engineering  skill  unsurpassed,  after  20  years 
of  struggle  for  inception  and  existence  and  notwithstanding  half  a 
dozen  or  more  enabling  Acts  of  Parliment,  and  more  than  ten  millions 
of  dollarr.  of  expenditures,  has  in  two  years  become  bankrupt,  and 
demonstrated  that  passengers  prefer  ferries  to  tunnels  for  crossing 
rivers. 

Compare  the  two  Situations. 

Assuming  the  present  pretense  to  be  the  true  purpose,  that  is,  to 
"  carry  antl  fetch  "  between  Long  Island  and  New  York  City,  and  not 
to  transfer  from  the  West,  under  New  York  City,  to  Montauk  Point, 
our  proposed  tunnel  railway  must  depend  upon  passengers  to  and 
from  New  York  City  to  Long  Island  exclusive  of  Brooklyn,  for 
Brooklyn  is  south  of  Manhattan  Island  and  will  not  be  accommodated 
by  a  Thirty-eighth  street  tunnel,  and  Long  Island  has  no  mineral  or 
other  products,  worth  mentioning,  which  this  city  needs  to  the  extent 
that  its  transportation  will  pay  a  fair  investment  percentage  upon  a 
construction  account  of  more  than  ten  millions  of  dollars,  and  a  work- 
ing expenditure  of  70  per  cent,  of  gross  income.  In  such  case  the  de- 
mand for  and  prospects  of  the  tunnel  under  the  Mersey  were  im- 
mensely superior  to  those  of  the  East  River  Tunnel. 

Liverpool,  the  natural  metropolis  of  the  great  manufacturing  districts 
of  Lancashire  and  York  and  the  agricultural  districts  of  Cheshire,  is 
situated  on  the  northwesterly  side  of  the  Mersey  River,  almost  exactly 
corresponding  in  tunneling  width,  so  to  speak,  to  our  East  river,  upon 
the  opposite  bank  of  which  is  situated  its  suburb  Birkenhead,  con- 
taining a  part  of  the  renowned  Liverpool  Dock  s}*stera,  the  two  places 
being  separated  by  a  river  traversed  only  by  about  half  a  dozen  ferries, 
which  transport  about  26,000,000  of  passengers  a  year.    Birkenhead  is 


42 


located  upon  a  tongue  of  land  belonging  to  (  Ik  shire,  about  H  or  9 
miles  wide,  and  hounded  upon  its  northwesterly  side  hv  the  Mersey,  and 
on  the  southeasterly  side  hv  tin-  river  Dee,  which  separates  it  from 
Wales.  Wales  is  that  portion  of  England,  consisting  of  ahout  12 
counties,  lying  on  the  western  coast,  north  and  east  of  the  Severn 
river,  and  south  and  east  of  the  Mersey,  its  coast  line  l»eiiiLr 
on  the  Irish  sea.  Wales  is  mountainous  and  abounds  in  minerals, 
and  Liverpool  is  its  natural  port.  Liverp>ol  wanted  the  commerce  of 
Wales  more  than  Birkenhead  wanted  Liverpool  to  have  that  which  she 
thought  naturally  belonged  to  her  ;  just  as  L.>nLr  Island  wants  ;)  tunnel 
more  than  New  York  City  wants  Long  Island  to  have  a  tunnel,  because 
Long  Island  covets  that  which  New  York  City  has.  and  New  York 

City  does  not  need  anything  thai  Long  Island  has.   The  Mersey  tunnel 

was  a  Liverpool  affair,  and  Birkenhead  refused  *t0  see  its  tremendous 
blessings  unless  she  was  paid  for  injury  to  her  ferry  franchises  and  in 
addition  had  good  security  for  the  damage  done  to  her  sewers,  streets 
and  citizens.  The  great  railway  companies,  in  order  tO  get  from 
Liverpool  to  Birkenhead  and  to  Wales  and  hack,  were  forced  to  make 
a  circuit  of  :}()  miles  and  cross  the  Mersey  at  Runcorn  by  a  most 
expensive  bridge.  The  Mersey  tunnel  under  the  river  was  ahout  a 
mile  long  from  abaft  to  shaft,  which  is  about  the  length  of  our  pro- 
posed one.  The  Mersey  railway  proper  was  about  three  miles  long, 
including  that  portion  under  the  river,  while  our-  is  proposed  to  be 
about  five  miles.  The  less  than  three  miles  of  the  Mersey  railway  cost 
over  ten  millions  of  dollars,  notwithstanding  it  bored  its  way  through 
the  most  desirable  material,  new  red  sand  stone  ;  and  its  officials 
bragged  that  it  cost  only  about  two  millions  of  dollars  per  mile,  which 
they  claimed  was  only  about  oce-half  of  the  cost  of  similar  tunnels. 
What  will  our  five  miles  of  tunnel  cost  at  this  rate?  Let  the  aban- 
doned Hudson  River  Tunnel  answer  !  The  Mersey  consisted  of  three 
or  more  tunnels— a  main  tunnel,  another  tunnel  to  ventilate  the  main 
tunnel  through,  another  tunnel  to  drain  the  main  tunnel  through.  It 
was  found  necessary  to  change  the  air  in  the  Mersey  tunnel  every  seven 
minutes  by  the  operation  of  four  immense  fans,  sending  the  sucking 
currents  through  the  auxiliary  tunnel.  What  would  become  of  pas- 
sengers in  that  tunnel  in  case  of  an.accident  to  train  and  fans  ?  Would 
it  not  be  difficult  to  demonstrate  anything  left  of,  30  feet  wide,  Thirty- 
eighth  street  after  boring  three  tunnels  through  it  of  the  required  dimen- 
sions ?  The  proof  of  the  substantial  correctness  of  these  statements  is 
given  below,  mostly  in  the  language  of  the  officials  and  friends  of  the 
Mersey  tunnel.  Read  it.  It  is  lengthy  but  profitable— it  affords  us 
facts  in  the  place  of  theory. 


43 


Favorable  Statement  of  "the  Mersey"  officials — interest 
tng  as  indicating  the  experience  our  tunnel  must 
encounter. 

A  statement  by  the  officers  and  promoters  of  the  Mersey  Railroad, 
entitled  "Private,  not  to  appear  in  print  before  Thursday,  January  1, 
(1877),"  gives  the  most  favorable  history  of  the  scheme  from  its  incep- 
tion it  is  susceptible  of,  by  which  it  appears  that  previous  to  the  year 
1864,  various  projects  for  crossing*  the  Mersey"  -  *  *  "  had  been 
suggested,  but  nothing  of  a  practical  kind  seems  to  have  been  done  until 
the  autumn  of  that  year,  when  a  bill  was  deposited  for  the  Birkenhead 
and  Liverpool  Railway. "    This  was  defeated. 

Consolidation — Temporary  Abandonment. 
The  next  year,  1865,  bills  were  deposited  for  three  schemes  for 
crossing  the  Mersey,  one  was  for  this  tunnel — another  for  a  bridge,  and 
the  third  for  a  pneumatic  tunnel.  The  pneumatic  tunnel  scheme  only 
was  adopted,  but  languished,  while  various  other  schemes  were  started 
and  abandoned  in  1866,  1867  and  1868.  On  December  22,  1869,  a 
meeting  was  held  and  all  other  than  the  pneumatic  scheme  were 
abandoned,  and  in  1870  and  1871  that  scheme  was  turned  into  a  rail- 
way tunnel  project,  and  it  was  incorporated  under  its  present  name, 
the  "  Mersey  Railway  Company."  After  sinking  a  shaft  90  feet  deep 
on  the  Birkenhead  side,  which  disclosed  sound  rock,  the  work  was 
abandoned. 

Six  Years  for  a  Partial  Completion. 
Finally,  in  1879,  a  contract  was  effected  with  Major  Isaacs,  backed 
by  a  powerful  body  of  capitalists.  "  The  work  was  at  once  taken 
in  hand  in  earnest,  the  ground  for  the  shafts  on  either  side  of  the  river 
being  broken,  in  December,  1879,  just  six  years  ago,  *  *  *  and 
from  that  date  to  the  present  *  *  *  work  on  the  railway  has  never 
stood  still  for  a  single  day  save  Sundays."    *    *  * 

Preliminary  Experiments  cost  $600,000.00. 
"  So  soon  as  the  shafts  were  sunk  the  first  object  of  the  engineer 
*  *  .  *  *  was  to  push  forward  the  trial  heading  on  either  side  to- 
wards the  river,  so  as  to  test  and  prove  the  nature  of  the  strata  to  be 
worked  in  as  soon  as  practicable."  *  *  *  The  drift ways  towards 
the  river  were  carried  forward  deep  down  in  the  rock,  and  gradually 
rose  towards  the  centre  of  the  river  so  as  to  drain  off  the  water  from 
the  workings  to  the  pump.  Powerful  pumping  engines  were  put  clown 
on  either  side  of  the  river. "  *  *  *  "  By  June,  1881,  Major  Isaac  and 
his  friends,  after  an  outlay  of  some  £125,000,  felt  themselves  justified 


1 1 


by  the  progress  made,  and  Hit-  knowledge  and  experience  of  the  strata 
under  the  river  which  had  by  that  time  been  gained,  in  applying  to 
the  public  for  Capital."  (This  was  successfully  made).  "  The  works 
have  been  driven  day  and  night,  with  three  shifts  of  men  working  for 
eight  hours  each."    *    *  * 

NOTWITHSTANDING    THE    "Sol-ID  "    Ro(K    IT    KKqi.'IKhD   AN  KXTHA 

Shaft  to  keep  THE  'Fennel  from  being  diiow.nkd. 
In  September,  1HH1,  it  was  found  necessary  to  have  a  second  shaft 
on  either  side  of  the  river,  so  that  it  might  he  exclusively  devoted  to 
pumping  purposes,  while  the  spoil  from  the  workings  •  *  * 
should  be  brought  to  the  surface  by  the  new  shaft."  *  *  "The 
formation  of  the  second  shaft  was  followed  by  the  laying  down  of  an 
additional  pumping  set." 

Main  Tennee  COMMENCED  before  preliminary  Tests 
<  » »\i  jm.etei  ». 

"  The  progress  already  achieved  with  the  trial  headings  was  con- 
sidered to  warrant  the  Hoard  in  announcing  their  intention  to  proceed 
at  once  with  the  main  channel  without  waiting  for  the  complete  pierc- 
ing of  the  rock  from  side  to  side.  WhiNt  the  work  was  actually  pro- 
ceeding in  the  drift  way,  the  excavation  for  the  actual  tunnel  was 
accordingly  pushed  on,  but  owing  to  the  gradient  following  the  river, 
it  was  necessary  to  get  rid  of  any  water  that  accumulated  at  the  faces, 
To  this  end  bore  holes  were  put  down  at  stated  intervals  into  the 
drainage  headings,  and  as  each  advanced  hole  was  bored  the  preced- 
ing was  plugged  up." 

Parliamentary  Aid  solicited — Damages  bkoin  to  appear. 

In  autumn,  1881,  it  was  found  necessary  to  apply  to  Parliament  for 
extended  powers  ;  the  question  of  damages  to  the  Ferry  rights  of  the 
Birkenhead  Corporation  came  to  the  surface.  It  resulted  in  a  clause 
compelling  the  Mersey  Railway  Company  to  pay  £50,000  within  six 
years  as  compensation  for  the  damage.  "  This  transaction  evoked 
strong  expressions  of  opinions.  *  *  *  On  the  one  hand,  it  was 
strongly  urged  that  the  town  of  Birkenhead,  which  was  to  benefit  so 
much  and  in  so  many  ways  by  the  construction  of  the  tunnel,  should 
have  gladly  abandoned  all  right  they  might  have  to  compensation." 

Curious  "throbbing"  from  Dynamite  firing. 
In  October,  1882,  Mayor  Isaac  gave  a  lunch  to  the  Lord  Mayor  of 
London  in  the  tunnel  works.     "  The  proceedings   *    *   *  were 
enlivened  by  the  occasional  accompaniment  of  shot  firing  with  dyna- 


45 


mite  at  the  rock  faces  when  the  work  was  progressing,  the  vibration 
causing  a  curious  throbbing  along  the  smooth  brick  arching  of  the 
tunnel." 

Boring— Breaking— Bricking— Sand— The   tunnel   and  drift 
way  meet  January  17,  1884. 

"  In  the  spring  of  1883  the  boring  machine  of  Colonel  Beaumont, 
R.  E.,  was  added,  and  it  greatly  accelerated  the  driving  of  the  head- 
way and  the  main  tunnel.  The  cutting  instruments  are  disks  of  chilled 
cast  iron,  set  in  strong  iron  bar,  which  is  made  to  revolve  by  means  of 
compressed  air,  and  thus  scoops  out  a  tunnel  seven  feet  in  diameter. 
By  progressive  improvements  in  the  mechanism,  to  suit  the  special 
quality  of  the  rock,  Colonel  Beaumont  obtained  a  high  degree  of  speed 
of  over  fifty  linear  yards  per  week,  which  left  far  behind  the  old 
method  of  blasting  by  dynamite  or  tonite.  Mr.  AVardwell's  apparatus, 
in  breaking  up  the  rock  at  different  places  to  the  size  of  the  main 
tunnel,  and  bricking  in  short  lengths,  followed  close  upon  the  tunnel 
driver  by  Colonel  Beaumont ;  and  all  through  1883  and  1884  the  works 
both  under  the  Mersey  and  on  the  landward  extensions,  were  in  full 
swing."  "The  visitors  *  *  *  inspected  the  lower  drainage 
headings  *  *  *  and  the  devices  to  dispose  of  the  water  which  per- 
colated through  the  rock  during  the  process  of  construction."  *  *  * 
"On  the  Cheshire  side  a  splendid  engineering  work  was  completed 
at  immense  cost  through  soft  sand,  the  difficulty  and  importance  of 
which  the  passengers  *  *  *  will  have  no  idea."  The  17th  Jan., 
1884,  was  a  great  day  in  the  history  of  the  Railway,  for  the  last  few 
feet  of  rock,  which  divided  the  Beaumont  tunnel  on  the  Birkenhead 
side  from  the  drift  way  on  the  Liverpool  side  were  broken  away  by  the 
boring  machine.  *  *  *  "  The  distance  across  from  shaft  to  shaft 
was  1,770  yards,  or  rather  more  than  a  mile    *    *    *  ." 

Main  Tunnel  26  by  23  feet. 

"  So  soon  as  the  necessary  length  of  excavation  at  each  face  of  the 
'  brick  ups '  in  the  tunnel,  some  9  to  12  feet,  was  taken  out,  the  brick- 
layers came  in  and  rapidly  built  up  the  permanent  tunnel.  This  consists 
of  from  six  to  eight  rings  of  the  most  solid  brickwork  in  cement,  the 
two  inner  curves  being  blue  Staffordshire  or  Buckley  bricks.  The 
width  of  the  tunnel  is  26  feet,  the  height  above  rails  19  feet,  giving  a 
height  of  23  feet  from  invert  to  crown  of  tunnel.  At  the  two  stations 
*  *  *  the  tunnel  arch  is  enlarged  to  50  feet  6  inches  span  and  32 
feet  in  height,  by  a  length  of  400  feet, 


n; 


A  Tl  NNKI,   I  OK  VENTILATION. 

"  In  addition  to  the  Railway  tunnel,  :i  parallel  drift  way  was  driven 
by  the  Beaumont  Boring  .Machine  for  the  purposeof  ventilation,  This 
ventilation  heading  is  2, :;<»()  yards  in  length,  and  is  connected  with  the 
railway  tunnel  in  eight  different  places  by  means  of  cross  cuts,  which, 
being  provided  with  suitable  doors,  enables  the  air  to  be  conducted  to 
the  fans  from  a  number  <>|  points. 

"  The  ventilation  If  effected  by  means  of  four  Guibal  fans,  two  on 

the  Birkenhead,  and  two  on  the  Liverpool  side  of  the  river.  One  DO  feet 
in  diameter    *    *    *    throws  ls«,()00  cubic   feet  of  air  per  minute 

*  *  *  the  fan  at  Shore  road  is  40  feet  in  diameter  by  12  feet  in 
width  in  the  blast,  and  this  draws  the  air  from  the  tunnel  at  the  centre 
of  river  through  the  ventilation  heading  up  to  the  fan  itself.  The 
principle  aimed  at  in  the  scheme  is  that  pure  air  shall  enter  the  station, 
and  travel  inwards  in  either  direction  into  the  funnel  to  the  respective 
fans,  thus  keeping  the  plat  forms  as  free  as  possible  from  the  smoke. 

*  *  *  The  fans  at  Liverpool  are  similar  to  those  at  Birkenhead." 

The  quantity  of  air  thrown  by  all  four  fans  is  about  (JOO.000  feet  per 
minute.  So  that  the  entire  air  of  the  tunnel  is  changed  every  seven 
minutes.  (Suppose  they  break,  wh  it  then  ?  ) 

It      Mu  iIIM  KY    STOPS    IT  WILL    BE    "SOMK  HOUHs"    BEFORE  THE 
TRACKS  WILL   BE   OXDEB  WATER. 

"  The  company  's  pumping  machinery  is  capable  of  dealing  with  four 
times  the  quantity  of  water,  which  makes  its  way  into  the  drainage 
headway,  and  even  were  the  pumps  from  any  cause  temporarily  to 
cease  work,  it  would  take  some  hours  before  the  water  rose  to  the  level 
of  the  rails  in  the  tunnel." 

Gas  Preferable  to  Electric  Light. 
"The  engineers  are  believed  to  have  evinced  sound  judgment  in 
deciding  to  light  the  stations  with  gas  in  preference  to  electricity,  *  *  * 
it  was  considered  that  it  should  not  be  adopted  unless  gas  was  also 
immediately  available,  in  case  of  the  inevitable  break  down  that  sooner 
or  later  occurs.  *  *  *  An  equivalent  amount  of  light  in  each 
case,  the  cost  of  establishing  the  latter  is  still  four  times  that  of  the 
former." 

Connection  with  Railway  System   discovered  to  be  a 
necessity. 

"  In  the  last  session  of  Parliament  (1886),  the  company  obtained  an 
act  for  connecting  the  tunnel  with  the  line  of  railway  running  along 


47 


the  Liverpool  dock."  *  *  *  "  On  the  Birkenhead  side,  the  company 
obtained  an  act  in  1880,  foi  a  branch  in  the  direction  of  North  Birken- 
head and  the  Great  Float,  along  the  line  of  Beckwith  street,  to  a  station 
under  the  Park  beyond  Duke  street.  Here  it  will  be  met  by  the  Wirral 
Railway,  which  will  unite  it  with  the  railway  now  for  many  years 
running  from  the  head  of  Wallsey  Pool  to  Hoylake,  thus  bringing 
Hoylake  and  West  Kirby  and  their  neighborhood,  unsurpassed  as 
watering  places  and  for  all  residential  purposes,  within  less  than 
half  an  hour's  through  railway  journe}^  from  the  Liverpool 
Exchange."        *  * 

The  completion  of  the  first  stage  of  the  Mersey  Railway,  marking 
the  point  where  it  could  be  operated,  may  be  said  to  be  when  it  received 
the  statutory  inspection  by  the  Government  Inspectors  which  took  place 
January  4,  1886. 

Promised  Inducements  to  Investors. 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  briefly  the  high  expectations  indulged  in 
by  the  promoters  of  the  Mersey  Tunnel,  as  well  as  by  men  prominent 
in  public  affairs,  and  of  showing  the  superior  reasons  for  success  in  the 
case  of  the  Mersey  Tunnel  over  the  East  River  Tunnel  in  the  scheme 
as  now  presented,  and  of  showing  how  deplorably  those  expectations 
were  disappointed  when  put  to  the  practical  test ,  attention  is  called  to 
the  following.  The  Directors  in  1881  published  a  statement  from  which 
the  following  facts  are  taken  : 

"  Capital,  £866,000  ($4,330,000)"  *  *  *  The  railway  will  be  a 
little  over  two  and  a  half  miles  in  length.  *  *  *  The  traffic  is 
estimated  as  follows  :   *'..*   *    13,000.000  passengers  per  annum,  at 

an  average  fare  of  2d.  each   £108,323 

500,000  tons  goods  per  annum,  at  Is.  per  ton.  25,000 

Parcels  and  sundries   6,000     *      *  * 

D  'duct  50  per  cent,  for  working  expenses,  net  balance,  £58,866. 
Equal  to  a  dividend  of  9  per  cent,  upon  the  capital." 

"  Shafts  were  sunk  *  *  *  to  a  depth  of  18'")  feet  in  order  to  drive 
a  trial  heading,  which  should  also  serve  to  drain  the  main  tunnel. 
*  *  .*  The  quality  of  the  rock  proving  on  both  sides  of  the  river  to 
be  both  hard  and  uniform,  the  company  has  determined  to  proceed 
with  the  main  tunnel."    *    *  * 

About  the  same  time  the  Mayor  of  Liverpool  said  :  "  It  is  an  under- 
taking which  would  rank  as  one  of  the  most  important  engineering 
works  of  the  present  generation,  *  *  *  uniting  together  the  two 
great  parts  of  the  Mersey  Dock  estate,  and  linking  together  the  manu- 


facturing  population  of  Lancashire  and  Yorkshire  with  the  agricultural 
and  mining  districts  of  Cheshire  and  North  Wales. H 

1  )i  moran  >nh — Power. 
The  Chairman  upon  the  same  occasion  said  :  "The  two  main  maftl 
have  been  sunk,  that  at  Liverpool  to  the  depth  of  1?-'.  feet,  with  a 

diameter  bf  15  feet  .  and  that  at  Birkenhead  to  a  depth  of  170  feet  with 
a  diameter  of  17  feet.    *    *    *    The  diameter  of  the  second  shafts 

were  each  ten  feet  ;  the  pumping  power  at  the  Liverpool  end  amounts 
to  seven  million-  per  diem  :    *  ;i    that  at  Birkenhead  end  to  no 

less  than  six  millions,  "    up  to  (he  present  time ;  the  water 

which  has  been  forced  at  either  end  of  the  work-  has  been  mainly 
derived  from  land  sources,  and  that  there  is  very  little  evidence  of  any 
water  coming  from  the  bed  of  the  river.  *  •  *  The  traffic  which 
we  may  expect  with  regard  to  good-  and  minerals  is  one  which  I  will 
not  dilate  upon  to-day,  but  1  will  point  .-ut  that  there  la  a  great  business 
to  be  done  in  that  way.  Kven  H  W6  run  paesenger  trains,  as  we  hope 
to  do,  every  five  minutes  during  the  day  hours,  at  night  we  shall  be  able 
to  run  mineral  trains,  and  if  gentlemen  bare  considered  the  importance 
of  the  great  coal  fields  of  North  Wales  to  the  City  of  Liverpool,  they 
will  atonce  perceive  the  enormous  prospect  of  business  there  is  in  the 
way  of  transporting  minerals  from  Flintshire  and  Denbigshire  to  the 
City  of  Liverpool.  We  have  also  some  of  the  best  building  stone  in 
the  world  *  *  and  other  products,  such  as  lime,  which  are  ready 
for  importation  to  Liverpool  as  soon  as  fresh  communication  can  be 
arrived  at." 

In-phess  of  Wateu— TnE  Great  Danoek. 
The  London  Times  of  October  31,  1881,  said  : 

"An  engineering  enterprise  of  great  boldness,  and  one  which  will 
link  together  the  railway  systems  of  Lancashire  and  Cheshire,  now 
divided  by  the  deep  waters  of  the  Mersey.  *  *  *  The  lowest> 
point  at  which  the  Mersey  is  bridged  is  at  Runcorn,  where  the  London 
and  Northwestern  Railway  Company  have  constructed  one  of  the  most 
massive  bridges  in  the  kingdom.  *  *  *  The  passenger  traffic 
also  promises  to  be  considerable,  inasmuch  as  this  line  will  draw 
together  the  750,000  residents  in  Liverpool  and  the  suburbs,  and  the 
100  000  dwellers  on  the  Cheshire  banks.  *  *  *  It  will  be  a  work 
of  enormous  magnitude.  *  *  *  The  geographical  formation  is 
favorable  to  tunneling.  The  stratum  consists  of  red  sandstone  of  solid 
formation.  *  *  *  The  in-press  of  water,  of  course,  is  the  danger 
chiefly  to  be  apprehended. 


49 


Can  Long  Island  offer  New  York  City  such  Inducements  as 
the  following — for  the  voters  it  proposes  to  extract. 

Hod.  Wm.  E.  Gladstone,  Oct.  16,  1886,  said  : 

"How  is  Liverpool  situated  ?  No  one  can  fail  to  be  struck,  upon 
looking  at  the  map.  by  the  peculiarity  of  its  position.  It  is  impossible 
to  conceive  a  more  favorable  situation,  if  you  look  at  the  back  country 
to  the  east,  because  there  it  has  that  vast  manufacturing  district  which 
it  supplies  with  the  necessary  materials  of  its  industry  and  with  a  large 
portion  of  its  food.  But  that  relates  to  the  east  alone.  Look  to  the 
wTest,  and  see  how  Liverpool  is  situated  on  the  west.  In  the  first  place, 
you  have  the  Mersey  running  nearly  north  and  south  ;  thus  you  have 
the  Hundred  of  Wirral,  wrhich  is,  after  all,  but  a  narrow  strip  of 
country  ;  and  then  intervenes  another  river,  separating  the  Hundred  of 
Wirral  from  Wales,  as  the  Mersey  separates  it  from  Liverpool.  Now 
the  intervening  of  these  two  rivers  did  for  a  long  time  make 
Liverpool  a  perfectly  solitary  towm  so  far  as  the  country 
lying  westward  is  concerned.  *  *  *  You  have  efficient 
railways — but  those  railways,  unfortunately,  laboring  under 
the  fatal  disadvantage  of  making  long  circuits.  *  *  * 
Now  what  is  the  position  of  North  Wales  ?  *  *  *  But  it  is 
extremely  rich  in  minerals.  *  *  *  I  take  the  stone  of  North  Wales. 
*  *  *  Take  slate  alone.  *  *  *  There  is  coal.  *  *  *  There 
are  brick  and  clay  works  carried  on  largely  in  North  Wales.  *  *  * 
The  most  valuable  commodity  wTe  produce — the  one  which  approaches 
nearest  to  a  precious  metal — is  the  commodity  of  lead.  *  *  *  Now, 
these  commodities  must  be  carried  b}T  railways,  which  cannot  bring 
them  direct  to  Liverpool.  Liverpool  is  the  natural  metropolis  of  North 
Wales.  *  *  *  It  has  been  cut  off  from  you  *  *  *  by  these 
two  rivers,  and  until  the  great  enterprise  of  the  tunnel  was  commenced 
nothing  else  could  be  taken  in  hand,  with  serious  advantages  for 
effecting  the  happy  marriage,  if  I  may  so  call  it,  between  Liverpool 
and  North  Wales." 

Count  the  Cost. 

The  chairman  upon  the  same  occasion  said:  "He  had  been  asked 
several  times  where  was  Wirral  ?  That  to  his  mind  displayed  very 
great  ignorance.  However,  they  knew  that  the  Hundred  of  Wirral 
was  an  oblong  part  of  Cheshire,  situated  between  the  Dee  and  the 
Mersey,  about  18  miles  long  and  from  six  to  eight  miles  broad.  *  *  * 
With  respect  to  the  Mersey  tunnel,  he  might  mention  that  he  had 
received  that  morning  a  communication  from  Mr.  Fox,  the  engineer, 
to  the  effect  that  out  of  a  distance  of  1,770  yards  between  shaft  and 


50 


drift  on  each  side  of  the  M.tm-v.  that  morning  there  only  remained 
'»•)-,  vanls  to  complete  and  finish.  Mr.  Fox  mentioned  a  circumstance 
which  was  perhaps  very  encouraging  to  then,  that  1  he  cost  of  th« 
Mcrsev  Kailwav  was  something  about  £400.000  per  mile-not  much 

more  than  ball  what  the  Metropolitan  Railway  was,  £770,000  per 

mile,  while  the  Metropolitan  District  Railway  co-1  £710,000  a  mile. 
The  20,000.Uhy  ok  passengers  urn-  pkei-ekk»:i>  mil  Ferries. 

\  Prospectus  issued  bv  the  Directors,  Feb  1.  1886,  said  :  M  At  the 
present  time  the  traffic  is  carried  across  by  means  of  Steain  Ferries. 
Over  20,000,000  of  passengers  are  ferried  across  annually.  *  The 
total  tonnage  annually  carried  amounts  to  more  than  T.WtfKl  tons. 
*  *  *  At  the  present  time  all  the  railway*  on  the  Liverpool  squ- 
are compelled  to  earry  their  traffic  round  to  Kw  Birkenhead  side  by 
making  a  detour— via  Runcorn,  of  over  30  miles." 

Now  i  on  mi,  Realization— Receivers  Appointed. 
The  report  of  the  Directors  for  the  half  year  ending  December  31st. 
1S*7  wh.n  The  Mersev  Railway  was  in  the  hands  of  a  Receiver 
appointed  by  the  High  Court  of  Justice-says:  "The  total  receipts 
from  all  sources  for  the  half  year  ended  December  31.  18*7,  have  been 
£20  469  9*.,  as  compared  with  £21,482.15*.  for  the  corresponding 
period  of  1886.  *  •  *  The  working  expense  having  been  "  * 
Li  the  rate  of  77.78  per  cent.  *  *  *  The  number  of  passengers  con- 
veved  dnring  the  six  months  ended  December  81,  1887,  has  been 
o  492  070  as  against  2,992,428  for  the  corresponding  period  of  1886. 
*  *  '  *  The  number  of  ordinary  passengers  conveyed  since  the  date 
of  its  opening — 

Feb  1886,  5  months  2,492,957  Season  Tickets  1184. 
Dec  31   "     6       "      2,992,423  "       •  "71. 

June  30,' '87,  6  •«  2.865,555  3002. 
Dec.  31,    "    6       "      2,492,070  "  29ol. 

"Ho.l.  Statement  of  capital  authorized  and  created  by  the  com- 

^  The  Mersey  Railway  Acct.  of  1866,  1871,  1882,  1883,  1884,  1885, 
-  1886,  1887,  was  on  stock  and  shares  £2,685,000,  Loans,  £394,600. 
"  Total  £3,573,600.  0 

»  Expenditures  on  lines  computed   «  Zi  %a  Q 

Deduct  on  Debenture  Stock  ....ll.bbi 

£2,258,088  8  0 


51 


"  Miles  authorized — lines  owned  by  the  company  6  in. — 0  f.  8  ch. — 
miles  constructed,  3  m.  4  f.  4  ch.— miles  constructed  or  to  be  con- 
structed 2  m.  4  f.  4  ch.— miles  worked  by  engines  2  m.  3  f .  4  ch." 

Damages — The  Ninth  Parliamentary  Act  applied  for. 

The  Liverpool  Daily  Post,  of  Tuesday,  July  24,  1888,  under  the 
caption  "The  Mersey  Railway  Bill — A  New  Arrangement" — prints 
the  following,  "  The  bill  of  the  Mersey  Railway  Company  for  new 
works  and  fresh  capital  came  before  a  Select  Committee  of  the  House 
of  Commons  yesterday  *  *  *  Mr.  Bidder  explained  the 
object  of  the  bills,  viz  :  to  complete  works  on  the  Liverpool  and 
Birkenhead  side  and  to  issue  £200,000  new  debenture  stock. 

Bankruptcy — Birkenhead,  like  New  York  City,  wants  to 
handle  the  security. 

*  *  He  stated  that  the  company  was  in  serious 
pecuniary  difficulties  ;  at  present  they  owed  about  £20,000  for  deben- 
ture interest  besides  which  they  had  a  large  number  of  creditors, 
amongst  others  the  contractor  and  the  corporation  of  Birkenhead. 
The  latter  seemed  to  take  a  very  shortsighted  view  of  the  case,  because 
the  operation  of  the  company  would  enormously  raise  the  value  of 
property  in  Birkenhead.  Under  an  existing  Actj  of  Parliament 
the  parties  were  obliged  to  pay  the  corporation  £50,000.  They 
had  already  been  paid  £20,000,  and  £30,000  was  still  due.  The 
corporation  said  they  would  not  object  to  the  company  raising  further 
capital  provided  that  the  £30,000  still  due  to  the  corporation  was  fully 
secured  and  they  asked  that  their  debt  should  be  made  a  first  charge 
on  the  undertaking."    *    *    *    "Mr.  Scotter  further  stated  that 

*  *  *  the  debenture  holders  had  met  and  assented  to  the  scheme, 
which  would  enable  the  company  to  raise  £200,000,  as  a  predebenture 
stock,  and  £318,000  behind  that."  "Mr.  E.  P.  Bouvier,  Chairman 
of  the  Mersey  Railway  Company,  stated  *  *  *  if  the  bill  did  not 
pass  nobody  wrouid  get  anything  *  *  *  they  were  now  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Wirral  system,  on  the  other  side  of  the  water. 

Damages. 

Cross-examined  ;  No  doubt  a  great  deal  of  damage  had  been  done 
by  the  works  in  Beckwith  street/'  *  *  *  Mr.  Gill, 
Town  Clerk  of  Birkenhead,  said  the  work  in  Beckwith  street  has 
caused  a  complete  disorganization  of  the  sewerage  system.  The  local 
Government  Board  had  sent  down  an  inspector,  and  an  expenditure  of 
£6,000  had  been  sanctioned  to  make  good  the  damage.    The  necessary 


52 


works  would  bo  completed  in  three  or  faff  —flu,  and  in  the  tfcn 
time  the  taxpayer-  would  have  to  bear  tin-  expense.  The  corporation 
did  not  object  to  the  company  bavin-  further  borrowing  powers,  but 
they  asked  that  before  the  new  works  were  -one  on  with  the  corpora- 
tion should  be  recouped  the  £0,000  they  had  already  incurred,  that  the 
property-owners  who  had  been  injured  should  also  be  compensated, 
and  that  a  sum  of  money  should  be  deposited,  sufficient  to  cover 
similar  Injuria  to  public  and  private  property  that  might  be  caused  in 
future  *  *  *"  -Mr.  Bidder  said  he  would  have  no  objection  to 
come  under  an  obligation,  that  when  the  line  went  under  a  street  the 
whole  or  a  part  of  it  should  be  done,  "  cut  and  cover."  "  Mr.  E  P. 
Smith  irave  similar  evidence,  and  also  spoke  to  the  injury  to  property 
along  the  line  already  made  The  owners  were  strongly  opposed  to 
the  wcrrk  going  on  unless  security  was  given.  , 

PARLIAMENT    WAS    <  oNTI.MP1.ATIV.    HOW    BEST    TO    GET  OUT  OF  A 
"  G  UK  AT    ELARD8HTP  "  Wi    MOKK    WIM.LY   PUOI'OSK    TO   Kl  LP 

OUT. 

"  The  committee  having  consulted,  the  Chairman  said  they  had 
carefully  considered  the  suggestion  of  counsel  in  regard  to  the  whole 
case,  which  was  one  of  great  hardship,  and  they  were  of  the  opinion 
that  the  preamble  of  the  bill  was  proved,  subject  to  the  insertion  of  a 
clause  for  making  the  new  extension  to  the  Birkenhead  docks  under 
the  plans  known  as  "cut  and  cover." 


The  True  Interests  of  New  York  City  -  What  are 

they? 

Tins  is  i  xdoubtedly  a  Far  West  and  Atlantic  Freioht 

Road. 

The  endeavor  has  been,  in  the  foregoing  two  divisions  of  this  brief, 
to  expose  the  attempted  concealment  of  the  real  purpose  of  the  New 
York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company,  and  to  show  that  if  it  is  to 
confine  itself  to  "  traffic  "  between  New  York  City  and  Long  Island, 
as  it  now  seems  to  pretend,  the  tunnel  is  an  enterprise  of  such  immense 
magnitude,  in  difficulties  to  be  overcome,  in  time  to  be  consumed  in 
construction,  and  in  cost  to  be  incurred,  as  to  stamp  the  scheme 
indelibly  as  a  piece  of  financial  folly.  Showing  this,  leads  to  the 
inevitable  conclusion  that  the  pretended  purpose  is  not  the  true  one  ; 
but  that  the  real  purpose  is  that  originally  published  by  this  company— 
namely—"  To  connect  with  what  is  now  known  as  the  Hudson  River 


53 


Tunnel "  :  That,  of  course,  meant  precisely  what  the  Alderman  sus- 
pected, namely — transportation  from  the  South  and  West  under  New 
York  City  to  some  other  locality  than  Xew  York  City.  The  Hudson 
River  tunnel,  by  itself  considered,  was  not  necessarily  detrimental  to 
this  city  because  it  terminated  in  the  city  ;  but  connecting  it,  or  any 
similar  tunnel,  with  another  tunnel  which  continues  under,  across  and 
beyond  the  city,  indicates  a  new  purpose  and  presents  a  different  ques- 
tion for  discussion. 

Is  this  Charter  merely  oxe  to  Speculate  ox  ? 

Xo  one  in  his  senses  can  doubt  that  either  this  scheme  is  another  of 
those  nefarious  projects  for  obtaining  chartered  rights  at  the  expense 
of  the  public  and  of  property-owners,  under  the  pretense  of  affording 
great  public  convenience,  but  really  for  the  purpose  of  hawking  the 
charter  as  a  speculative  enterprise,  of  which  this  city  has  had  sad 
examples,  or  that  it  is  intended  to  convey  "long  haul "  freight  to  ship- 
ping at  Montauk  Point  or  Gowanus  Bay,  where  extraordinary  prepara- 
tions are  being  made  to  avoid  Xew  York  City  charges,  or  to  some  other 
Long  Island  port. 

The  intimation  that  a  paying  passenger  traffic  could  be  induced 
through  a  dark,  deep  subaqueous  tunnel  of  such  a  character  as  the  pro- 
posed one  in  competition  with  our  adequate  ferry  and  bridge  facilities, 
even  though  the  tunnel  were  conveniently  located,  can  only  excite  the 
smile  of  incredulity. 

If  such  had  been  its  purpose,  that  tunnel  would  have  been  located 
between  Xew  York  City  and  Brooklyn  instead  of  between  Long  Island 
*  City,  Biackwell's  Island,  Kipp's  Bay  and  AVeehawken,  a  route  accom- 
modating the  criminal  class  much  more  than  ordinary  travelers.  The 
Mersey  tunnel  succeeded  in  inducing  less  than  6,000,000  of  the 
26.000,000  annual  ferry  passengers  through  its  subterranean  bore  dur- 
ing the  first  year  of  its  operation  ;  and  the  number  grew  less  and  less 
as  the  novelty  wore  off  and  the  danger  became  more  apparent.  That 
the  proposed  tunnel  will  meet  with  competition  still  more  disastrous 
the  very  nature  of  the  situation  and  the  Mersey  experience  demonstrates 
beforehand. 

Brooklyn  is  Loxg  Island. 
So  far  as  passenger  traffic  is  concerned  Brooklyn  is  Long  Island  ; 
and  substantially  all  of  Brooklyn  lies  south  of  a  line  drawn  east  and 
west  across  Xew  York  City  at  Houston  street.  Below  this  line  sub- 
stantially all  of  the  passenger  traffic  between  the  two  cities  crosses  the 
river.  Is  it  to  be  pretended  that  instead  of  crossing  Brooklyn  Bridge 
or  our  numerous  and  ample  short  ferries,  that  of  Houston  street  being 


54 


only  725  yards  in  length,  passengers  are  likely  for  the  purpose  of 
patronizing  this  tunne  to  travel  the  three  miles  on  Manhattan  Island  to 
Thirty-eighth  street,  one  mile  under  the  cast  river,  and  tour  miles  on 
Lom/lsland,  substantially  right  miles,  and  such  miles,  in  going  from  the 
City  Hall  in  New  York  to  the  City  Hall  in  Brooklyn,  and  substantially 
un  equal  average  distance  from  and  to  other  points  in  the  two  cities. 
No  proposition  could  better  define  absurdity. 

Is  Tnis  Tunnel  for  Local  Freight  ? 
Where  is  local  freight  in  paying  quantities  to  come  from  and  go  to  ! 
Long  Island  is  already  more  thickly  settled  with  railroad-  than  with 
anything  else.  Does  it  expect  thil  tunnel  will  give  them  Something  to 
do?  Brooklyn  from  Greenwood  Cemetery  to  the  Bridge  is  the  retreat 
where  New  York  traders  go  to  vote  and  to  rest  ;  a  city  of  churclief, 
whose  inhabitants  resort  to  this  city  for  their  secular  pursuits. 

Long  Island  is  not  famous  for  its  minerals,  woods,  granaries,  manu- 
factories llocks,  herds,  or  for  its  commerce  in  carrying  these  com- 
modities for  others.  It  requires  onh  supplies  for  it-  domestic  use,  and 
no  one  has  ever  been  impressed  with  any  public  clamor  on  the  part  of 
its  inhabitants  that  the  consumption  of  the  necessaries  of  life  transcend* 
the  ability  of  the  bridge  and  the  ferries  to  supply. 

If  the  idea  that  this  tunnel  is  intended  for  such  local  passengers  and 
freight  as  could  be  induced  into  its  inconvenient  and  forbidding 
channels  must  be  dismiss,,!  U  chimerical,  then  this  projected  tunnel 
must  be  none  other  than  that  suspected  by  the  Board  of  Aldermen, 
namely:  One  designed  to  avoid  transhipment  in  New  York  City,  and 
therefore  necessarily  tending  to  cripple  its  commerce  and  to  retard  its 
prosperity. 

The  Aldermen  are  Bound  to  Oppose  this  Tunnel. 
The  Board  of  Aldermen  of  New  York  City  is  not  a  charitable  or 
an  eleemosynary  institution,  but  strictly  the  constituted  guardians  of 
the  material  interests  of  the  municipality  alone.  It  may  truthfully 
be  affirmed,  unci  affirmed  in  no  illiberal  or  narrow  sense,  that  it  would 
be  the  duty  of  the  Board,  if  it  were  possible  without  retarding  the 
city's  growth,  to  compel  every  person,  who  permanently  transacts  his 
business  within  this  city,  to  reside  within  its  limits,  vote  at  its  polls, 
build  its  dwellings  upon  its  vacant  lots,  and  not  only  pat  its  taxes 
here,  instead  of  into  the  treasury  of  its  neighbors,  but  by  his  occupa- 
tion'enhance  the  valuation  of  surrounding  city  property  and  thus 
furnish  somewhat  of  the  means  it  costs  this  city  to  afford  him  his 
business  facilities.  This  may  not  be  compelled,  but  should  it  not  so 
far  as  possible  be  induced  ?    Should  an  opposite  policy  be  tolerated  ? 


55 


The  immense  cost  of  caring  for  and  repairing  the  miles  of  streets 
already  occupied  and  of  preparing  for  occupation  our  uninhabited 
domain  must  be  paid  for  by  local  taxation,  and  the  values  upon  which 
such  taxation  is  based  are  so  enhanced  by  occupation  that  the  first 
great  duty  of  the  local  government  is,  by  every  means  in  its  power, 
to  first  people  its  own  territory,  and  afterwards  look  with  complacency 
upon  its  overflow,  through  which  its  neighbors  thrive. 

Municipal  transactions  should  primarily  tend  to  local  advantage. 
AVhen  yielding  advantage  to  others,  this  city  should  seek  its  recom- 
pense, precisely  as  individuals  do,  by  exacting  equivalents.  What 
equivalent  has  Long  Island  or  New  Jersey  to  offer  New  York  City 
for  inducing  her  business  men  to  become  their  citizens,  when  its  own 
lands  are  not  half  populated  ? 

Every  facility  afforded  for  more  accessible  homes  off  Manhattan 
Island  than  on  it  ;  every  neglect  to  open  up  and  to  render  attractive 
and  accessible  to  the  utmost  degree  to  our  traders  and  our  laborers  our 
own  unimproved  lands  amounts  to  such  an  inducement. 

Tms  City  has  been  more  Generous  to  its  Neighbors  than  just 

to  Itself. 

Rapid  transit  up  the  Island  instead  of  off  the  Island  should  have 
been  the  policy  of  the  past,  and  must  be  the  policy  of  the  future.  The 
aggregate  loss,  in  its  multitude  of  forms,  arising  from  this  mistaken 
policy  of  the  past,  no  man  can  calculate.  In  some  of  its  phases,  how- 
ever, it  is  appreciable.  Brooklyn  and  even  Jersey  City  have  out- 
stripped New  York  City  in  percentage  of  increase  of  population.  If 
our  increase  in  the  last  eight  years  had  equaled  the  percentage  attained 
by  Brooklyn  we  should  now  number  about  1,800,000  inhabitants,  in- 
stead of  about  1,600,000.  That  200,000  of  population,  if  it  could  be 
restored  to  this  city,  and  settled  around  its  new  and  magnificent  parks, 
would,  from  taxation  arising  from  increased  valuations,  amply  supply 
the  fund  for  their  purchase  and  improvement.  From  what  source  has 
Brooklyn  or  Jersey  City  gained  this  extra  population,  excepting  from 
New  York  City  ?  If  the  same  facilities  had  been  afforded  to  our  busi- 
ness men,  and  our  laboring  men,  in  search  of  cheap  homes,  to  rapidly 
reach  the  healthful,  beautiful  and  inexpensive  building  sites  within 
our  city  limits,  that  we  have  afforded  by  our  twenty-five  ferries 
and  Brooklyn  Bridge,  by  which  to  get  off  the  Island,  will  any  one  pre- 
tend that  the  natural  attractions  of  Long  Island  and  Jersey  City  would 
have  so  fatally  competed  with  Manhattan  Island  in  this  matter  of  pop- 
ulation ? 


f)fi 


Shall  we  continue  the  tendency  in  the  wrong  direction  by  authoriz- 
ing tunnels  to  Long  Island  which  can  by  no  possibility  do  other  than 
withdraw  from  us  our  resources  I 

What  made  New  York  and  what  mainly  Contributes  to  its 

ClJoW  1  II 

The  unrivaled  geographical  position  and  harbor  determined  the  site 
of  New  York  City,  and  the  necessity  that  the  products  of  the  earth 
and  of  the  industries  in  their  transit  to  and  over  the  Atlantic  and  across 
the  Continent  should  be  handled  here  tilled  that  site  with  its  marvel- 
ous enterprise  and  prosperity.  Tunnels,  railroads  and  other  transport- 
ation companies  which  aim  solely  at  their  own  interests  and  not  at 
the  city's  ;  whose  dividends  might  be  enhanced  if  they  could  get  rid  of 
the  toll. for  handling  their  cargoes,  upon  which  handling  our  city 
thrives,  have  some  reason  for  asking  tunnel  privileges  under  New  York 
island,  but  the  Board  of  Aldermen  have  none  for  granting  them.  The 
time  may  arrive  when  our  city  limits  arc  tilled  to  overflowing,  that  the 
policy  of  honeycombing  the  Island  under  our  streets,  parks,  churches, 
public  and  business  buildings  and  dwellings  in  the  interest  of  railroads 
who  want  to  pass  under  and  by  us  may  lie  tolerated,  but  that  time  is 
not  yet. 

Our  Unlimited  and  Marvelois  Attractions  invite  In*  reased 
Rapid  Transit  to  the  Northern  Limits  of  the  City. 

We  have  generously  contributed  toward  populating  the  16  odd 
square  miles  of  Jersey  City,  the  26  odd  square  miles  of  Brooklyn,  and 
is  it  not  obvious  that  all  our  tendencies  should  now  tend  toward 
peopling  the  41  square  miles  of  New  York  City.  This  city 
is  the  metropolis  of  a  nation  which  will  in  1927  contain  nearly 
200,000.000  of  people  if  the  rate  of  increase  continues  in  the 
future  as  in  the  past.  Ten  years  before  that  period,  if  true  to 
its  own  interest,  New  York  City  ought  to  have  a  population  of  about 
six  millions.  To-day  it  has  less  than  2,000,000,  while  possessing  land 
capacity  for  more  than  three  times  that  number.  Broad  and  bountiful 
provisions  for  future  millions  has  marked  our  recent  policy.  "We  • 
have  doubled  our  territory  by  annexing  12,317  acres  of  land  beyond 
the  Harlem  River  ;  we  have  added  3,800  odd  acres  to  our  1,200  odd 
acres  of  Parks  and  Parkw  ays.  We  have  increased  our  water  supply 
by  completely  draining  two  counties  at  an  additional  cost  of  over 
eighteen  millions  of  dollars,  and  now,  logically,  we  should  husband 
our  resources  for  peopling  our  unimproved  acres. 


57 


No  city  on  the  face  of  the  earth  can  equal  the  location  of  New  York 
in  everything  that  contributes  to  health  and  comfort.  Its  territory, 
stretching  about  17  miles  northward  from  the  Battery  to  its  Pelham 
Bay  Park,  over  hill  and  valley,  woods  and  streams,  is  washed  by  broad, 
deep,  rapid  rivers,  and  enjoys  both  sea  and  mountain  air.  For  about 
13  miles  above  the  Grand  Central  Station  it  exhibits  one  of  the  best 
park  systems  in  the  world,  culminating  in  Pelham  Bay  Park,  which 
alone  presents  nine  miles  of  seashore,  and  is  justly  called  "  the  New- 
port of  the  toilers."  Any,  even  the  most  distant  part  of  this  magnifi- 
cent domain  can  and  ought  to  be  within  half  an  hour's  ride  of  every 
dwelling  within  the  city  limits,  and  reached  at  a  cost  of  five  cents 
fare.  To  accomplish  this,  rapid  transit  up  and  down  the  city  alone  is 
wanting.  When  it  is  realized  there  will  be  an  end  to  the  pretense 
that  our  wage-earners  must  become  citizens  of  New  Jersey  or  Long 
Island,  and  in  their  daily  experience  be  liable  to  encounter  the  annoy- 
ance and  detention  of  fog  and  ice  upon  the  river,  or  the  more  ob- 
noxious experience  in  tunnels,  for  their  cheap  homes  will  be  located 
within  the  city  limits  and  at  less  distances  from  their  work  than  is 
required  to  escape  the  miasmas  of  New  Jersey  marshes  or  the  stenches 
of  the  proposed  tunnel,  and  its  freightage  of  "garbage,"  and  the 
odors  of  Newtown  Creek. 


Rapid  Transit  Will  Pay. 

No  policy  can  be  wiser  than  for  our  City  Government  to  encourage 
every  reasonable  project  for  permanent,  pleasant  and  inexpensive 
transportation  to  and  beyond  the  Harlem  ;  and  no  policy  can  be  more 
suicidal  than  to  grant  cross-town  privileges  which  will  erect  themselves 
into  barriers  to  progress  up  and  down  the  city's  length.  The  New 
York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Tunnel,  if  authorized  from  river  to 
river,  will  gird  the  city  midway  with  an  impassable  zone  of  selfishness 
potert  to  arrest  that  kind  of  rapid  travel  which  the  interest  of  the  city 
imperatively  demand  with  its  claim  of  "vested  rights."  Locate  the 
monopoly  ever  so  deep,  ever  so  shallow,  its  claims  for  facilities  deeper 
and  higher  than  its  legal  location  will  surely  embarrass  progress  across 
its  fatal  line. 

The  rapid  transit  of  the  future,  while  securing  untold  advantages  to 
the  community  at  large,  ought  not,  as  in  the  past,  systematically  to 
rob  the  property  owners  along  its  routes  of  their  property  and  rights. 
The  swift  and  endless  increase  of  transportation  patronage,  which  the 
future  of  this  city  must  guarantee,  will  afford  ample  revenue  out  of 
which  to  compensate  property  owners,  pay  honest  construction  bills 


and  ample  dividend*.  The  city  could  well  afford,  when  considered  as 
8  financial  venture  Bkme,  itself  to  DuBd  these  rapid  transit  roads,  iii 
view  of  the  immense  revenue  it  would  secure  from  increase  of  valua- 
tion arising  from  Improvement  and  occupation  of  its  territory.  All 
experience  in  this  country  and  elsewhere  proves  the  profitableness  of 
municipal  improvements  in  the  shape  of  pleasure  grounds,  drives 
and  parks.  It  is  estimated  that  the  excess  of  taxation  upon  the  in- 
crease of  valuation  caused  by  laying  out  Central  Park  has  already 
repaid  for  its  six  or  seven  millions  of  dollars  cost  of  land,  its  twenty 
thousand  dollars  per  acre  cost  of  improvements,  and  left  a  balance 
in  the  city  treasury  of  more  than  seventeen  millions  of  dollars. 

Tin.  Majority  Km  pout  ok  thk  Railroad  Company  sums  it  thi 
Aroumknt. 

Extensive  argument  may  elaborate,  but  it  can  hardly  improve  the 

statement  of  the  true  grounds  of  objection  to  the  tunnel  ■cheane  so 

tersely  given  in  the  majority  report  of  the  railroad  committee  of  the 
Hoard  of  Aldermen,  portions  of  which  have  already  been  quoted  herein. 
The  length  of  this  paper  can  only,  alter  BUCh  B  convincing  report  and 
such  an  overwhelming  defeat  of  the  scheme,  be  justified  in  view  of  the 
unparalled  audacity  of  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Com- 
pany in  making  a  second  application  to  this  Board  for  substantially 
the  same  favor,  which,  after  months  of  unopposed  hearing  afforded 
it.  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  nineteen  to  four,  and  after  experiencing  a 
no  less  signal  defeat  at  the  hands  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State,  and 
after  a  cool  reception  from  the  Supreme  Court,  upon  a  petition  still 
pending  asking  it  to  override  the  constitutional  authority  of  this  Board 
to  pass  upon  the  question  of  public  necessity  for  this  tunnel,  and  after 
other  efforts  to  insult,  malign  and  punish  this  Board  for  daring  to 
refuse  to  grant  to  a  corporation— having  only  a  paper  existence,  with 
a  capital  of  one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  and  concerning  which,  in 
its  petition  to  the  Supreme  Court,  it  says,  '"that  at  least,  one  thousand 
dollars  for  every  mile  of  railroad  proposed  (5  miles  is  the  length) 
*  *  *  has  been  duly  subscribed  in  good  faith,  and  ten  per  centum 
of  the  par  value  thereof  has  been  paid  in  cash  "  (about  500  dollars  casfi 
capital)— the  right  to  undertake  an  enterprise  requiring  from  ten  to 
twenty  millions  of  dollars,  to  accomplish,  to  say  nothing  of  the  damage 
with  which  it  will  menace  twenty  millions  of  private  property  and  the 
true  interests  of  the  city  and  of  its  inhabitants.  I  repeat  that  nothing 
but  the  unapproachable  assurance?  of  such  an  application  under  such 
circumstances  can  excuse  the  length  of  this  paper. 


59 


"What  possible  grounds  can  exist  justifying  this  second  application  ? 
Is  resort  to  other  than  argument  to  be  relied  upon  by  this  corporation  ? 
Is  it  to  be  assumed  that  the  Board  of  Aldermen  are  so  craven  as  to 
reverse  their  majority  of  19  to  4  under  the  intimidation  which  has  been 
attempted  by  this  corporation  ? 

So  long  as  the  Aldermen  stand  upon  the  unanswerable  reasoning  of 
their  Railroad  Committee's  Majority  Report,  it  will  cost  but  little 
courage  to  predict  that  they  cannot  be  indicted,  however  many  times 
they  reject  this  double  faced,  perilous  tunnel  scheme. 


B.  F.  WATSON,  Of  Counsel 
for  Thirty-eighth  Street  Property  Owners. 


REJOINDER 

TO  THE 

Reply  of  EVERETT  P.  WHEELER  &  A.  D.  PALMER. 


"RAPID  TRANSIT  UP  THE  ISLAND, 

INSTEAD  OF 

RAPID  TRANSIT  OFF  THE  ISLAND." 


WATSON. 


62 


Committee  of  Tltiriy-t  iyhth  Stmt  Proprrt//  tjirncn  : 

B.  F.  Watson,  Chairman, 
('.  P.  Lati  in<;.  Secretary.  . 
Chaklek  T.  Barney,  Treasurer, 
Peter  ('.  Baki  i; 
Samuel  P.  A  very. 
Wm.  L.  Andrews, 
James  M.  Cohbtable, 
b.  f.  Dujuulnq, 

Louis  F.  Kieker.  M.  I).. 

Charles  S(  ki i;n i:h. 

Titom  kB  BoBBA, 

William  R.  (ii:  \  «  i 

Henry  Steers, 

Hansel  M.  Streeter,  M.  D., 

Jacob  Wendell 

Executive  Committee : 
Watson,  Baker,  Latting,  Barney,  Avery. 


63 


In  the  Matter 

*/ 

The  second  application  to  the  Board  of 
Aldermen  by  the  New  York  and 
Long  Island  Railroad  Company  for 
leave  to  excavate  a  tunnel  under  New- 
York  City,  through  Thirty-eighth  street, 
and  to  operate  a  railroad  therein,  with 
branches,  tunnels,  etc. 


B.  F.  Watson's  Rejoinder 
on  behalf  of  the  prop- 
erty-owners on  Thirty- 
eighth  street,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  tunnel. 


This  rejoinder  is  to  the  reply,  on  behalf  of  the  petitioning  railroad 
company,  of  Appleton  D.  Palmer,  attorney,  and  Everett  P.  Wheeler, 
counsel,  to  the  brief  of  the  undersigned  in  answer  to  the  first  brief  of 
the  petitioners  presented  to  the  Aldermanic  Committee  on  Bridges  and 
Tunnels. 

Briefly  stated,  the  history  of  this  tunnel  scheme  is  as  follows  :  Cer- 
tain persons  formed  a  corporation  under  the  statute  and  certified  that 
their  nominal  capital  stock  was  $100,000,  of  which  five  per  centum,  or 
$5,000,  had  actually  been  subscribed,  and  ten  per  centum  of  such  sub- 
scriptions, that  is.  $500,  had  actually  been  paid  in.  This  company 
applied  about  January,  1888,  to  the  Board  of  Aldermen  for  leave  to 
tunnel  under  the  East  river  and  under  Manhattan  Island  for  the  pur- 
pose of  forming  a  connection  with  the  Hudson  River  Tunnel  and  for  a 
railroad  therein  to  be  operated  as  a  common  carrier  of  persons  and 
property.  There  was  no  opposition  made  to  this  application,  for  the 
reason  that  the  pendency  of  the  petition  was  not  communicated  to  those 
who  would  be  likely  to  oppose  it.  After  repeated  hearings  before  the 
Aldermanic  Committee  on  Railroads,  at  which  interested  testimony  was 
given  and  a  so-called  petition  of  workiugmen  was  introduced  (the  pe- 
culiar method  of  obtaining  the  signatures  to  which  were  carefully  con- 
cealed), the  Railroad  Committee  reported  against  the  scheme,  giving 
most  cogent  reasons  therefor,  and  the  Board  rejected  the  application  19 
to  4.  Application  was  then  made  by  this  corporation  to  the  Legisla- 
ture of  New  York  State  for  such  amendments  to  existing  laws  as  would 
enable  it  to  nullify  the  opposition  of  the  Aldermen  and  to  secure  the 


right  to  tunnel  under  the  city  in  spite  of  the  Hoard.  The  opponents 
of  the  scheme,  after  a  brief  exposition  of  its  true  character,  had  no  dif- 
ficulty in  effecting  its  defeat  by  the  Legislature.    This  corporation  then 

applied  to  the  Supreme  Court  to  enforce  the  same  law  sought  to  be 
amended,  notwithstanding  it  had  been  declared  by  the  Court  of  Ap- 
peals t<>  be  unconstitutional,  again  endeavoring  thereby  to  nullify  the 
authority  of  the  A Idermen,  conferred  upon  them  by  the  Constitution 
of  the  State.  The  Court  refused  to  entertain  the  petition  at  that  time 
on  the  ground  that  the  property-owners,  who  were  the  most  interested 
parties,  had  not  been  given  sufficient  notice  of  the  application  and, 
against  the  strenuous  oppposilion  of  this  corporal  ion.  it  postponed  the 
hearing  from  June  to  October.  That  petition  is  still  pending  and  will 
be  prosecuted  after  the  Aldermen,  upon  this  application,  again  refuse 
their  consent.  Immediately  following  this  third  failure  some  one  at- 
tempted to  obtain  indictments  against  certain  of  the  Aldermen  for 
alleged  corruption  on  the  part  of  the  nineteen  Aldermen  who  had,  for 
unanswerable  reasons,  rejected  this  project,  which  attempt,  ftliSO,  WUB 

an  ignominious  failure.  Whereupon  this  corporation,  with  unparal- 
leled presumption,  made  this  second  application  to  the  Aldermen  for 
substantially  the  same  scheme  in  form  and  precisely  the  same  Scheme 
in  reality  a^  that  one  which  had  been  rejected  10  to  4;  and  this 
application  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Bridges  and  Tunnels. 
Every  effort  has  been  made  in  behalf  of  this  Corporation  to  force  a 
hearing  upon  this  second  application  during  the  usual  summer  vaca- 
tion. At  the  first  hearing  on  this  second  application  this  Corporation 
caused  a  printed  Brief  to  be  presented,  and  at  the  second  and  last 
hearing  two  unimportant  witnesses  were  examined  by  the  Petitioners 
and  oral  arguments  were  made  for  and  against  the  scheme  and  the 
undersigned,  on  behalf  of  the  opponents,  presented  a  Brief  in  answer 
to  that  of  Petitioners  and  the  Committee  adjourned  for  the  purpose  of 
making  up  and  presenting  their  report  to  the  Board.  Subsequently 
the  Reply  on  behalf  of  this  Corporation  to  the  Brief  of  the  under- 
signed was  written,  printed  and  distributed;  and  to  that  Reply  this 
Brief  is  a  rejoinder. 

The  said  Brief  of  the  undersigned  argued  in  favor  of  "Rapid 
Transit  up  the  Island  instead  of  Rapid  Transit  off  the 
Island  ; "  the  argument  being  arranged  under  three  general  heads, 
namely  :  1st  "  The  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company— 
What  is  it?"— 2d  -  The  Mersey  Railway  "—3d  "The  true  interests 
of  New  York  City— What  are  they  ?  " 

Under  the  1st  General  Head  it  was  shown  that  this  Corporation  after 
each  failure  pretended  to  alter  its  scheme  in  just  so  far  as  seemingly  to 


65 


avoid  the  latest  objection,  while  in  fact  it  retained  its  original  purpose. 
This  inconsistent  and  sinuous  course  rendered  it  an  object  of  just 
suspicion.  It  was  demonstrated  that  the  real  purpose  of  this  scheme, 
originally  avowed,  but  subsequently  denied,  to  avoid  the  opposition  of 
the  Board  of  Aldermen,  was,  to  transport  the  products  of  the  West 
under  New  York  City  to  some  cheaper  port  of  shipment,  thereby 
avoiding  the  handling  charges  for  transshipment  in  this  city.  It  was 
shown  that  if  this  was  not  the  real  purpose  the  scheme  was  a  financial 
folly  of  the  most  transparent  character  ;  that  it  was  absurd  to  suppose 
that  merely  local  traffic  in  transporting  persons  or  freight  to  and  from 
Long  Island  was  an  inducement  sufficient  to  secure  the  many  millions 
of  dollars  which  the  project  would  cost  to  complete,  if  it  ever  could 
be  completed.  It  was  shown  that  the  expense  of  pumping,  fanning 
and  operating  such  a  tuunel  would  amount  to  more  than  two-thirds  of 
any  possible  earnings. 

Under  the  2d  General  Head  the  extent  of  this  undertaking,  the 
immense  cost  it  would  entail,  the  years  which  would  be  consumed  in 
construction,  the  tremendous  engineering  difficulties  which  must  be 
encountered,  the  constant  danger  of  drowning  the  tunnel,  and  every- 
thing found  therein,  the  aversion  of  people  to  traveling  in  subaqueous 
tunnels,  the  financial  failure  which  was  certain  to  follow  the  invest- 
ment, were  demonstrated  by  citing  the  history  of  the  Mersey  Railway 
Tunnel  which  in  all  things  so  paralleled  the  proposed  tunnel  as  to  be  an 
apt  illustration  of  the  actual  experience  awaiting  this  project,  if  it  ever 
attained  any  stage  beyond  promises  and  theories.  The  Mersey  Tunnel 
proved  a  complete  failure,  involving  in  disaster  and  disappointment 
the  promoters  of  the  scheme,  the  contractor  for  building  it,  those  who, 
induced  by  extravagant  predictions,  invested  in  its  securities,  and  all 
property-owners  within  the  line  of  its  devastation. 

Under  the  3d  General  Head  it  was  shown  to  be  the  imperative  duty 
of  the  Aldermen  to  reject  the  scheme  of  a  few  speculators  to  subvert 
the  true  interest  of  the  municipality,  and  to  take  from  workiugmen  of 
this  city  the  handling  of  the  freightage  by  which  many  of  them  live  and 
thrive,  in  order  to  secure  an  increase  in  the  profits  of  the  great  railroad 
lines  which  are  common  carriers  between  the  West  and  the  port  of  New 
York  from  whence  their  cargoes  are  transshipped  for  foreign  ports. 
This  Brief  also  showed  that  in  the  past  the  facilities  furnishedby  the  action 
or  consent  of  this  city  enabling  our  business  men  to  reach  the  territory  of 
our  neighbors  had  been  altogether  out  of  proportion  to  those  furnished 
for  reaching  our  own  vacant  lands,  a  fact  resulting  in  our  detriment, 
and  that  it  was  the  obvious  policy  of  the  future  to  increase  the  facilities 
for  rapid  and  cheap  transportation  to  our  own  uninhabited  territory, 
5 


not  only  because  this  course  would  enrieli  tin's  city  by  the  increase  of 
valuation  arising  from  occupation,  but  because  these  lands  are,  in  all 
respects  of  location,  healthfulncss,  and  genera]  availability  for  poor  as 
well  as  rich,  superior  to  the  lands  of  Long  Island  or  New  Jersej  in 
the  vicinity  of  New  York  City. 

Since  the  hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Tunnels,  Information  has 
been  received  that  some  interested  parties  have  an  a gen(  now  in  BorOpe 
enlisting  capitalists  in  the  enterprise  of  resuscitating  and  completing 
the  drowned  Hudson  River  Tunnel.  The  fact  is  very  suggestive  and 
WOTthy  of  consideration  in  this  connection. 

Tjii.  Ri  i'j.v  Ki.vjkw  i  o, 

The  First  Point  of  the  Reply  asserts  this  petition  to  he  in  fact  an 
offer  of  $00,000  a  year  to  the  city  treasury  for  a  *  st  rip  of  rock"  which 
is  now  of  "  no  use  to  anyone"  and  for  which  "the  objectors  offer 
nothing  ;'"  and  claims  that  it  is  the  duty  "of  the  Aldermen  as  trustees 
of  the  whole"  to  put  this  sum  into  the  City  Treasury  ami  thereby 
secure  "compensation  for  the  imaginary  Injuries  Inflicted  by  the 
tunnel." 

"Compensation  "  for  "  imaginary  injuries  "  is  good. 

Nothing  could  better  illustrate  the  modesty  and  sincerity  of  this 
railroad  company  than  this  substantial  repetition  of  an  historic  offer  of 
all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world— an  offer  made  by  a  personage  who  did 
not  own  a  foot  of  land.  It  is  not  over-statement  to  characterise  this 
corporation's  offer  as  the  impudent  proposal  of  an  invader  to  divide  a 
small  percentage  of  the  loot  with  the  despoiled  owner.  This  offer  of 
$60,000  a  year  comes  from  a  corporation  which  <n\  -  : 

"  We  have  not  the  money  now,  because  we  have  no  franchise.  Give 
us  the  franchise  and  we  will  have  the  money." 

This  Offer  is  a  Mockery. 

The  Brief  of  the  petitioners  filed  the  27th  day  of  July  last  formally 
declared  that  the  City  was  not  entitled  to  any  compensation  for  grant- 
ing this  privilege.  Now  the  petitioners'  case  is  in  such  straits  as  to 
force  them  to  refer  to  an  offer  which  never  amounted  to  anything,  but 
which  has  been  formally  renounced. 

The  Offer  Plainly  Stated. 
The  offer  in  substance  is  :  If  the  Aldermen  will  grant  to  us  interests 
in  land  to  which  we  have  no  claim  and  over  which  the  abutting 
owners  only  have  legal  authority,  we  will,  if  successful  in  this  enter- 
prise, divide  the  earnings,  if  there  should  ever  be  any,  with  the 


67 


City  in  the  proportion  of  95  per  cent,  to  ourselves  and  5  per  cent,  to 
the  City. 

The  Abuttors  Own  all  Interests  in  the  Land  not  Included  in 
the  Easement  Belonging  to  the  Public  to  use  the  Street 
as  a  Highway. 

The  petitioners  say  that  the  objectors  "  offer  nothing  "  to  offset  their 
munificent  proposition.  True,  and  why  ?  Because  the  objectors  have 
bought  and  paid  for  this  "  strip  of  rock"  and  now  own  it.  The  high- 
est legal  tribunal  of  this  State  has  settled  the  law  to  be  that  whether 
the  abuttor  upon  a  New  York  City  street  has  or  has  not  by  technical 
terms  of  his  deed  obtained  title  to  the  centre  of  the  street  the  City 
Government  is  owner  only  of  the  easement  appertaining  to  a  public 
highway,  namely  :  the  right  of  the  public  to  travel  in  and  over  it,  and 
in  thickly  settled  localities  the  right  to  place  at  convenient  distances 
below  the  surface  such  facilities  for  watering,  lighting,  draining,  etc., 
the  locality  as  public  convenience  requires.  Even  in  the  case  where 
the  City  by  purchase  or  otherwise  secures  ownership  of  the  soil  of  the 
street  the  Court  of  Appeals  decides  that  the  opening  of  the  street  as  a 
public  highway  is  a  dedication  of  the  land  to  that  use  only  and  insures 
the  rights  and  interests  of  the  abutters  who  have  bought  and  improved 
their  lands  in  reliance  upon  the  absolute  condition  that  the  street  shall 
forever  be  exempted  from  any  other  use  than  that  imposed  upon  it  by 
the  easement  of  the  public  to  use  it  as  a  highway  ;  and  that  any  use  of 
the  surface  of  the  street  contemplated  in  its  dedication  as  a  public 
highway  does  not  infringe  upon  the  rights  of  the  owners  of  the 
adjoining  lands  because  they  purchased  with  such  an  incumbrance 
attached  to  it  ;  but  that  any  other  use  of  the  land  over  which  a  street 
is  laid,  or  use  of  the  air  space  above  that  land  is  a  trespass  upon  the 
abuttors'  rights,  which  the  law  does  not  sanction  and  will  punish. 
The  same  Court  also  holds  that  elevated  railroad  and  tunnels  in  streets 
are  not  such  use  of  the  street  as  its  dedication  as  a  public  highway 
contemplated. 

Whether  Tnrs  Tunnel  is  a  Financial  Success  or  not  the 
City  and  Abuttors  Suffer  Damage. 
The  Reply  says  that  if  it  be  true  as  the  objectors  allege  that  this  pro- 
ject cannot  prove  a  financial  success,  "the  parties  interested  in  the 
plan  are  the  only  ones  that  will  suffer  loss."  This  is  not  true.  A  com- 
pleted tunnel  unsuccessfully  operated,  or  a  partially  completed  tunnel, 
may  have  produced  as  much  havoc  among  the  Sewers  and  Subter- 
ranean Pipe  Systems  as  though  the  scheme  had  achieved  the  success 


68 


<»f  inducing  profitable  patronage  i  and  the  dcprcciat  ion  En  the  value  of 

property  along  the  street,  and  in  the  neighborhood,  which  the  very 
existence  of  a  tunnel  WOttld  create,  would  l>c  as  great  in  case  the 
BC&eme  failed  to  remunerate  its  promoters  as  otherwise.  The  City 
and  the  abut  tors  would  indeed  he  greater  losers  in  case  of  financial 
failure  of  the  enterprise,  because  in  such  case  there  would  he  no 
responsible  party  from  whom  to  enforce  payment  of  the  damages 
which  at  the  btiSl  would  fall  far  B&Qffi  of  compensit ion  for  the  injury 

inflicted* 

The  Second  point  of  the  Reply  asserts  that  "  if  the  residents  are 
injured  the  petitioner  will  be  obliged  t<>  pay  for  the  injury."  Pay  out 
of  what  fund?    A  capital  of  *  I  00.000  no.  $r,,ooo.00  of  which  have 

been  subscribed,  and  ten  per  cent,  of  such  Subscription  has  been  paid 
in.  will  hardly  repair  the  damage  to  $18,000,000.00  or  $20,000,000.00 
worth  of  private  dwellings,  and  churches.  The  Reply  objects  to  the 
valuation  placed  upon  their  property  by  the  abuttors.  The  [K-titioners, 
if  they  ever  get  M  far  BS  to  excavate  their  tunnel,  will  find  that,  upon 
the  question  of  damage-,  they  will  have  to  deal  with  market  values 
and  not  "assessed  values."  The  market  value  bai  not  been  over- 
stated ;  even  if  it  had  been,  men  have  the  right  to  affix  a  fictitious  value 
to  houses  which  arc  intended  for  their  own  comfort  and  pleasure  and 
which  are  not  for  sale. 

The  Reply  says  that  tunnels  may  be  built,  and  trains  run  therein 
"without  any  injury  whatever  to  the  abutting  owners:"  that  the 

petitioner  called  two  witnesses  who  showed  the  facts,  "and  that  not  a 
single  witness  was  called  by  the  objectors  to  prove  to  the  contrary." 
Did  not  the  objectors  call  "  the  Mersey  Railway,"  and  demonstrate  by 
actual  experience  the  foolishness  of  the  theory  that  blasting  and 
running  trains  of  cars  under  Sewers  and  foundations  of  buildings 
would  cause  no  damage  ?  The  Mersey  Tunnel  damaged  the  Sewerage 
System  of  Birkenhead  in  a  single  instance  more  than  $30,000.00,  and 
so  injured  property  that  all  property-owners  opposed  it. 

The  Reply  says,  "  The  objectors  ask  why  not  take  a  wide  street  ?" 
That  certainly  was  a  pertinent  question  which  is  not  satisfactorily 
answered  in  the  Reply. 

If  it  be  admitted  that  a  tunnel  will  less  endanger  property  along  a 
wide  street  than  along  a  narrow  street,  must  there  not  be  stronger 
reasons  than  the  convenience  of  the  corporation  for  choosing  the 
narrower  one  ?  It  has  been  aptly  said  that  ''beggars  should  not  be 
choosers."  The  interests  of  property- owners  and  of  the  city  should  be 
considered  rather  than  the  fear  of  this  corporation  that  the  opposition 
of  the  residents  on  a  street  proper  for  their  enterprise  will  be  so  great 


69 


that  they  find  it  more  convenient  to  select  an  improper  street.  It  is, 
however,  objected  that  the  five  or  ten  feet  difference  between  the  alti- 
tude of  Thirty-eighth  street  and  that  of  Thirty-fourth  or  Forty-second 
streets  makes  it  preferable  that  a  narrow  street,  filled  with  private  resi- 
dences, shall  be  fully  occupied  rather  than  that  of  a  wide  street  already 
devoted  to  business  and  to  surface  railroads  should  be  partially  occu- 
pied. It  is  absurd  to  claim  that  five  or  ten  feet  more  or  less  added  to 
the  depth  of  a  tunnel,  projected  150  feet  below  the  surface,  is  such  an 
obstacle  as  to  justify  an  improper  selection  of  streets.  The  assertion 
that the  selection  of  Thirty-eighth  street  will  enable  the  tunnel  to  be 
run  under  Tenth  avenue  without  interfering  with  the  sewer,"  is  only 
one  out  of  the  multitude  of  reckless  statements  in  which  this  Corpo- 
ration indulges.  By  referring  to  the  Brief  of  the  undersigned,  page  5, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  top  of  the  tunnel  at  Tenth  avenue  will  be  only 
seven  feet  below  the  surface  of  the  avenue.  The  sewer  at  that  point 
is  thirteen  feet  below  the  surface  of  that  avenue. 

The  Reply  asserts  that  property-owners  always  oppose  transportation 
facility  through  their  streets,  and  adds  :  "  The  owners  on  Third  and 
Sixth  avenues  opposed  the  elevated  roads,  and  yet  these  roads  doubled 
the  value  of  property.'"  The  cases  are  not  parallel.  The  elevated 
roads  were  absolutely  required  for  public  convenience,  and  they 
conveyed  patronage  to  the  doors  of  the  traders  on  those  avenues,  while 
this  tunnel  proposes  to  carry  freight  and  passengers  under  this  city  to 
the  doors  of  business  men  outside  the  city.  How  can  it  benefit  the 
people  on  Thirty-eighth  street  to  have  a  tunnel  which  is  to  have  "  no 
opening  in  the  street  '' — which  "  will  not  compete  with  any  existing 
railroad  ? "  Can  it  be  possible  that  the  writer  of  the  reply  believed  the 
Aldermen  so  dull  as  not  to  see  that  no  parallel  exists  between  the  tun- 
nel in  Thirty- eighth  street,  and  the  elevated  roads  in  Third  and  Sixth 
avenues  ? 

The  reference  to  the  Fourth  avenue  tunnel  is  quite  as  unfortunate. 
It  is  a  public  convenience,  if  not  a  necessity.  It  runs  up  and  down  the 
island,  and  lands  its  rich  freightage  in  our  city.  Moreover,  that  tun- 
nel was  a  choice  between  two  evils.  The  Harlem  railroad  claimed 
and  exercised  the  vested  right  of  running  through  Fourth  avenue  on 
the  surface  for  years,  killing  and  maiming  many  who  were  exercising 
the  right  to  traverse  the  city  streets.  It  took  years  and  almost  a  revo- 
lutionary rising  of  the  people  to  stop  this  carnage  and  put  this  railroad 
underground.  To  accomplish  it  cost  the  city  treasury  millions  of 
dollars.  Besides,  it  is  not  true  that  the  tunnel  is  no  annoyance  to  the 
abuttors  in  that  widest  avenue  in  the  city.  Shall  we  prevent  this  pro- 
posed tunnel  now  while  we  may,  or  grant  it  privileges  which  will  some 


70 


day  damage  and  annoy  the  property-owners  as  well  as  be  destructive 
to  the  bests  interests  of  this  community,  and  perhaps  eost  the  city  mil- 
lions of  dollars  to  abate  the  nuisance  it  will  create.  The  new-papers 
of  the  day  inform  us  of  the  catastrophe  l.arelv  averted  at  the  Hoosac 
tunnel,  where  the  foul  air  prostrated  fifty  or  itacty  workmen,  and  left 
them  lying  senseless  upon  their  backs,  liable  to  be  mangled  by  ap- 
proaching trains,  and  this  fearful  danger  was  the  result  of  the  earc- 
lessness  of  a  fireman,  who  put  on  fresh  coal  just  before  entering  the 
tunnel.  Who  can  predict  the  probable  injury  to  health  from  this  pro- 
pose,! tunnel,  whether  half  excavated  and  abandoned,  completed, 
abandoned  and  uncared  for,  owing  to  the  want  of  patronage,  or  suc- 
cessfully operated  as  a  commercial  conduit  ? 

The  Third  Point  of  tins  Reply  reasons  that  the  city  will  not  be 
injured  by  the  construction  of  this  tunnel.  This  is  the  vital  question. 
To  it  the  convenience  of  abuttors  becomes  secondary.  Let  it  be  shown 
that  the  public  interests  or  the  public  convenience  demands  this  meas- 
ure, and  the  Thirty-eighth  street  property-owners  w  ill  make  such  saeri 
tices  as  hccome  good  citizens.  The  proposed  sehcme  is  not  one  entitled 
to  demand  the  surrender  of  property  and  homes.  A  purely  specula- 
tive enterprise  demands  the  property  and  rights  of  the  cit\  and  of 
citizens,  to  be  used  as  its  capital,  and  this  not  in  response  to  public 
demand  or  clamor. 

This  Reply  fails  successfully  to  answer  the  brief  of  the  undersigned 
from  p.  33  to  p.  42,  showing  that  it  is  for  the  true  ImteBBBtfl  of  this 
municipality  to  facilitate  travel  up  the  Island  instead  of  off  the  Island  ; 
and  that  this  tunnel  not  only  will,  but  is  intended  to  benefit  other 
localities  at  the  expense  of  New  York  City.  The  argument  of  the 
Reply  seems  to  be  that  the  prime  concern  of  the  City  Government 
should  be  to  tax  the  people  who  do  reside  upon  the  Island  to  furnish 
the  funds  with  which  to  provide  facilities  for  doing  business  on  the 
Island  during  the  day  time  by  those  who  reside  and  pay  their  taxes 
elsewhere.  No  sophistry  can  controvert,  however  much  it  may 
obscure,  the  plain  proposition  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Aldermen  to 
promote  rapid  transit  up  the  Island  instead  of  off  the  Island,  so  that 
our  vacant  lands  may  become  improved  and  our  taxable  valuations 
increased,  instead  of  supplying  facilities  for  our  business  men  to  reside 
in  New  Jersey  or  Long  Island  while  they  enjoy  in  this  city  the  facilities 
for  making  fortunes  provided  by  the  overtaxed  citizens  thereof. 

The  Reply  says  that  "  no  one  can  deny  that  the  City  of  New  York 
is  overcrowded  on  the  part  of  the  Island  below  the  RarK."  No  one 
does  deny  it.  But  that  crowd  should  be  dispersed  into  our  own  vacant 
and  healthful  lands  instead  of  elsewhere.    The  Reply  fails  to  answer 


71 


the  Brief  of  the  undersigned  upon  the  point  that,  with  proper  rapid 
transit,  our  own  lands  are  not  only  more  accessible  but  are  in  every- 
way more  desirable  than  those  in  New  Jersey  and  Long  Island  which 
can  be  reached  within  the  same  distance.  It  must  need  be  up-hill 
work  for  any  one  to  prove  to  a  New  York  Board  of  Aldermen  that  the 
interests  of  the  City  call  upon  them  to  give  preference  to  their  neigh- 
bors rather  than  to  this  city  in  the  matter  of  rapid  transit.  The  propo- 
sition is  too  plain  to  be  controverted  that  there  has  been  a  mistake  in 
the  past  in  building  up  Brooklyn  and  Long  Island,  Jersey  City  and 
New  Jersey  at  the  expense  of  Manhattan  Island  and  the  upper  Wards. 
We  have  at  the  cost  of  millions  upon  millions  laid  the  foundations  for 
a  vast  city  beyond  the  Harlem,  and  it  would  be  simply  suicidal  to  hold 
out  inducements  for  our  people  to  shun  instead  of  occupying  the 
promised  land. 

The  Reply  scores  its  best  point  in  noting  the  failure  of  the  Brief  of 
the  undersigned  to  acknowledge  the  strongest  argument  in  favor  of 
building  this  tunnel  at  a  cost  of  $10,000,000  to  $20,000,000.  Namely, 
that  it  would  afford  conveniences  for  the  transportation  to  this  city  of 
Long  Island  "vegetables."  Those  vegetables  must  sell  for  several 
thousands  of  dollars  annually. 

But  the  Reply  errs  in  asserting  that  it  is  assumed  that  no  babies  are 
born  in  Brooklyn.  The  lament  was  only  that  they  are  not  born  in 
New  York  City  where  their  fathers  earn  the  money  with  which  to  run 
the  Nursery. 

The  Reply  thinks  it  will  be  a  great  advantage  to  working  men  to 
have  this  tunnel  built  here.  That  depends  very  much  upon  whether  the 
Contractor  gets  any  funds  with  which  to  pay  them.  The  contractor 
for  the  Mersey  Tunnel  was  left  unpaid  by  the  promoters  of  that 
scheme. 

As  was  stated  in  the  oral  argument  in  behalf  of  the  objectors  to  the 
tunnel,  it  matters  not  whether  it  means  connecting  the  West  with 
Montauk  Point  to  the  exclusion  of  New  York,  or  whether  it  means  con- 
necting the  West  with  any  other  locality  in  Long  Island  or  elsewhere 
to  the  exclusion  of  New  York.  That  the  project  means  to  exclude 
New  York  from  the  advantages  it  has  and  to  which  it  is  entitled,  is 
certain,  or  it  is  a  stupendous  financial  folly. 

The  Reply  undertakes  to  avoid  by  misrepresentations  the  illustration 
of  the  experience  this  tunnel  will  encounter,  if  it  is  ever  built,  so 
graphically  shown  by  the  history  of  the  Mersey  tunnel.  This  may  be 
found  at  pages  17-33  of  the  former  Brief  of  the  undersigned.  An 
attempt  is  made  to  liken  this  proposed  tunnel  to  the  New  Aqueduct. 
The  two  have  hardly  any  material  thing  in  common.   The  New  A  que- 


7-2 


duct,  an  unequaled  example  of  rapid  tunneling.  If  u  pipe,  "  a  head- 
ing," compared  with  this  proposed  tunnel  ;  it  i<  .1  subterranean  and  not 
a  subaqueous  tunnel.  It  is  true  brooks  and  sewers  were  encountered 
and  overcome  w  ith  little  difficulty  ;  the  Harlem  river  was  encountered, 
and  there  the  difficulty  and  the  expense  were  -«»  immensely  increased 
as  to  furnish  a  proper  subject  for  reflections  for  those  who  propose  to 
tunnel  under  the  Kast  river,  in  comparison  witib  which  the  Harlem  b 

but  a  brook.   The  Money  tunnel    an  apt  redaction  to  practice  of  the 

blind  and  variegated  theories  with  which  thON  petitioners  are  amusing 
the  Alderinen. 

The  Reply  complains  that  the  objectors  over-estimate  the  cost  of  the 
proposed  tunnel.  The  Mersey  tunnel  cost  something  about  £400,000 
($2, 00b, 000)  per  mile—  not  much  more  than  half  what  the  Metro 
politan  Railway  (London)  cost,  viz.  :  6770,000  per  mile  While  the 
Metropolitan  District  Railway  COat  £711,000  per  "mile. 

The  petitioners  considerately  assure  the  Aldermen,  "we  are  willing 
to  submit  to  any  reasonabl<  conditions  imposed  by  the  Board,  and 
amongst  other  things  that  we  should  consent  to  t  he  const  ruction  of  any 
rapid  transit  road,  either  above  or  below  our  tunnel.' 

Would  it  not  be  as  well  for  the  Aldermen  to  retain  in  their  own 
hands  the  power  to  "consent"  to  rapid  transit  up  the  island,  instead 
of  placing  it  in  the  hands  of  this  corporation,  whose  idea  of  "  reason- 
able conditions"  might  become  very  troubles,, me  after  they  had 
obtained  the  desired  privileges  and  crystali/.ed  them  into  "verted 
rights." 

The  shrewd  suggestion  of  Colonel  Titus  in  Parliament,  as  to  allow- 
ing the  claims  of  the  Pretender,  is  respectfully  recommended  to  the 
Aldermen  : 

M  I  tiear  a  lion  in  the  lobhy  roar  ; 
Say,  Mr.  Speaker,  shall  we  close  the  door. 
And  keep  him  there,  or  shall  we  let  him  in, 
To  try  if  we  can  turn  him  out  again  !  " 

B.  F.  WATSON, 

of  Counsel 
for  Thirty  eighth  Street  Property-owners. 


13 


New  York,  January  15,  1889. 

To  the  Honorable  the  Board  of  Aldermen  of  the  City  of  New  York : 

The  petition  of  the  New  York  and  Long  Island  Railroad  Company 
respectfully  shows : 

That  throughout  the  last  year  the  company  has  constantly  sought 
the  consent  of  your  Honorable  Body  to  the  construction  of  a  tunnel 
railway,  joining  this  City  with  Long  Island,  and  that  a  favorable  report 
and  resolution  was  presented  by  the  Committee  on  Bridges  and  Tun- 
nels of  the  late  Board,  but  too  late  to  be  acted  upon  by  that  Board. 

Your  petitioner  therefore  prays  that  early  action  be  taken  by  the 
present  Board,  agreeably  to  the  report  and  resolution  aforesaid. 

And  your  petitioner  will  humbly  pray,  etc. 

THE  NEW  YORK  AND  LONG  ISLAND  RAILROAD 
COMPANY, 

By  Roy  Stone,  President. 


* 


I 


